From: Mark Davis (mark.davis@jtcsv.com)
Date: Sat Mar 19 2005 - 14:03:01 CST
>Sorting of character data generally
> should not be done simply by comparing code point values.
Make that always. I don't know of a single language that uses absolute code
point order.
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@adelphia.net>
To: "Unicode Mailing List" <unicode@unicode.org>
Cc: "Ahmad Gharbeia" <gharbeia@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 10:04
Subject: Re: Incorrect names for Arabic letters
> Ahmad Gharbeia <gharbeia at gmail dot com> wrote:
>
> > The current Unicode standard has incorrect names for fourteen of the
> > basic Arabic script's twenty eight letters. With basic I refer to the
> > Arabic alphabet excluding the extended set of letters modified for
> > writing languages other than Arabic.
> > ...
> > Finally, the order of Arabic letters as defined in the current version
> > of Unicode, known as the Hegaa'i order, is a relatively newer order
> > where letters are sorted according to their shape proximity, and is
> > not the original Abgadi order, which matches the (ABC) ordering of all
> > alphabets derived from the original Ugaritic alphabet. Although it is
> > unlikely that this heritage of earlier encodings can be modified now,
> > this should be noted, however.
>
> For stability reasons, the names and code positions of characters in the
> Unicode Standard cannot be changed.
>
> It is possible to add annotations to the entries for various characters
> to indicate alternative spellings.
>
> The relative order of characters within a script often differs depending
> on the language using that script. Sorting of character data generally
> should not be done simply by comparing code point values.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> -Doug Ewell
> Fullerton, California
> http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 19 2005 - 14:03:55 CST