Re: Arabic 16-bit encodings

From: Gregg Reynolds (
Date: Sat Jul 02 2005 - 10:14:34 CDT

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Measuring a writing system "economy"/"accuracy"" wrote:
    > N. Ganesan <> wrote :
    >>What about Arabic script? The Middle East
    >>awash with funds and resources, and the script is in a
    >>wide area by lots of people. If
    >>"Unicode happens to also do serious damage
    >>to the entire world of right-to-left languages",
    > Scripts.

    No, language communities that use the scripts.

    >>is there a competition? Any 16-bit encodings
    >>for Arabic script other than Unicode?
    > I don't think so. But what is so damaging about this?

    1. Cost of implementing bidi support, which is unecessary for
    monolingual software. This indirect tax affects all language
    communities that use RTL writing systems.

    2. Conceptual errors in the legacy encodings adopted by Unicode, which
    means software needs a bunch of expensive logic in order to support the
    kind of text manipulation that an Arabic speaker might "naturally"
    expect. E.g. fathatan/dammatan/kasratan. (This may not apply to other
    languages.) It's conceivable that this situation could be remedied with
    appropriate proposals for Unicode.

    3. Traditional Arabic sorting (based on radicals) is impossible in any
    legacy encoding.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 02 2005 - 10:15:18 CDT