Re: Joining hamzah

From: Arno Schmitt (
Date: Tue Aug 26 2008 - 23:35:07 CDT

  • Next message: Rick McGowan: "New Public Review Issue #127, Proposed Update UAX #44 Unicode Character Database"

    Andreas Prilop wrote:
    AP> Is it okay to write the sequence
    AP> U+0640 U+0654
    AP> for a "joining hamzah"? Example:
    AP> ??????

    Bad idea -- I agree with John.
    This idea occurs naturally because hamza is wrongly defined.

    Hamza is a letter that is non-joining when
    a) initial
    b) final
    c) isolated i.e. final after a right-joining letter
        -- 'non-joining,' not 'breaking' as some call it:
           because there IS a break, its shape is non joining.
    Between lam and alef (which form a ligature) it is transparent.
    After a dual joining letter
      AND before a dual- or right joining letter it sits on a connecting
      stroke i.e. forces the first letter to have a longer connecting
      stroke to its left.

    So the font must know that something like U+0640 is needed
    graphically -- without appearing in the code.

    As to the *basic* shaping behaviour -- i.e. which of the four shapes
    a letter takes -- hamza is ALWAYS transparent.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 26 2008 - 23:38:25 CDT