Re: Arabic encoding model

From: Richard Wordingham (
Date: Sun Jul 03 2005 - 17:22:37 CDT

  • Next message: Alexej Kryukov: "Re: Greek curled beta in Unicode code chart"

    Ashraf Sadek wrote (and I apologise for mangling the name before):

    > From: "Richard Wordingham" <>

    >> The concept that the a base Arabic
    >> form could be combined with any combination of distinguishing dots
    >> (or other marks) wasn't formed,
    > You mean understood by the Unicode and ISO experts?

    I mean conceived of as a useful and natural way of thinking, more systematic
    than the similarities between 'b' and 'p' or between 'a' and 'd'.

    >>and would now be stymied by the
    >> 'stability pact' that requires that anything that is now in Normal
    >> Form Composed or Normal Form Decomposed remain so for ever.
    > I see: stuck with mistake, are we?

    In the long term it should not matter - the addition of new letters should
    slow to a very slow trickle. Once a letter is supported, it is probably
    better for it not to be decomposable - unless there is a significant impact
    on font design.

    > How about the simultaneous (I think) and recent (after the stability
    > normalisation pact) encoding of combining SMALL V and precomposed U+0756
    > Bā' with SMALL V? Why encode a precompose character now?

    I was going to suggest the explanation that Bob Hallissy has just
    confidently made.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jul 03 2005 - 17:28:20 CDT