From: arno (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Jan 04 2008 - 07:10:36 CST
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