From: Andreas Prilop (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Jul 28 2010 - 09:51:15 CDT
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010, David Starner wrote:
> MacArabic, Windows-1256 and ISO-8859-6 are all standards for
> the encoding of Arabic. Thus U+0649 must be an Arabic character;
> existing use in both those sets and in Unicode say that is.
By that circular logic, "S with cedilla" and "T with cedilla"
must be Romanian letters because they are included in ISO-8859-2.
Arabic 8-bit character sets go back to Arab ASMO standards
which are several decades old. These standards had isolated letters
"ya" with and without dots. I have no evidence that these ASMO
standards specified initial and medial forms of "ya" without dots.
The two letters were taken into Unicode as 0649 and 064A.
The question is:
When and why was it specified (in Unicode) that U+0649 should have
four glyphs all without dots?
The Arabic fonts in Windows XP (as well as other fonts I saw)
have only isolated and final glyphs for U+0649.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 28 2010 - 09:53:12 CDT