Re: chairless hamza

From: arno (
Date: Fri Jan 04 2008 - 07:10:36 CST

  • Next message: Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin: "Re: The Geejay"

    John Hudson wrote:

    > As you indicated, in some conventional usage the hamza is dividing

    No, this is not the case.
    No, I have not indicated it.
    Hamza is NEVER dividing -- although most of the time is is not joined
    (be at the end of the word, at its head or after a non-left joining letter)

    > (a better term, I think, than non-joining), while in other conventional
    > usage it is transparent according to context. So whichever way it is
    > defined in Unicode, some mechanism must exist for the alternative usage:
    > if it is defined as dividing, a mechanism is needed to make it display
    > as transparent in appropriate contexts; if it is defined in some way as
    > transparent then a mechanism is needed to make it display as dividing.

    John, please show that it is dividing
                      i.e. not divided, but dividing.

    Everything you suggest hangs on this fact/wrong assertion.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 04 2008 - 07:12:44 CST