[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Fwd: Arabic rendering of laam, fatHa, 'alif, etc.

This was recently posted on the 'general' list and hasn't gotten any
responses, so I thought we try some of the experts on this list.

Salam.

 - Nadim



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
--- Begin Message --- RE: Arabic rendering of laam, fatHa, 'alif, etc.

I've just joined Arabeyes and have been testing
Arabic editing/rendering using Gnome's gedit (v. 2.4.1)
and the fonts available from the khotot page.  (Thanks
to all involved for making these fonts available.)
I present below what I believe to be a few problems in
Arabic rendering.  I am _not_ an expert, so corrections
and clarifications would be welcome.  Please excuse me
if these issues should be directed to a more specific
audience.

**************

For everyday usage, I like the KacstBook.ttf font.
It's legible and attractive, and the harakat (diacritics)
come out, for the most part, where they should.

But I have noticed small problems involving the laam-alif
ligature with harakat.

If I enter the following sequence of three characters:

0644  (laam)
064E  (fatHa)
0627  ('alif)

then I _should_ see the laam-alif ligature with the fatHa
on top of the laam part.  But what I currently see rendered
is something roughly like the roman U (a naive linking
of laam to 'alif) with a fatHa on top.  This is not an
acceptable rendering.

Note that entering the sequence

0644  (laam)
0627  ('alif)

does cause the appropriate laam-alif ligature to be displayed.

****

Related problems:

If you enter the three characters 

0644  (laam)
0651  (shadda)
0627  ('alif)

then one _should_ see the laam-alif ligature with shadda on top
of the laam-ish part.  (What you see now is again the unacceptable
naive laam-alif combination with shadda on top.)

And if one enters the four characters

0644  (laam)
0651  (shadda)
064E  (fatHa)
0627  ('alif)

Then one _should_ see the laam-alif ligature with a shadda on top
of the laam-ish part
and a fatHa on top of that.  (What you see now is the unacceptable
naive laam-alif combination with shadda on top, and fatHa on top
of that.)

So somehow the font (or Pango rendering engine) should be fixed
to display the laam-'alif ligature even if shadda or fatHa or
shadda+fatHa are between the laam and 'alif.  I don't know enough
about TrueType fonts, or Pango, to know where the fix should or
could be made.

****

Dagger-alif problems:

Spacing problem: If you enter the sequence

0644  (laam)
0651  (shadda)
0670  (dagger 'alif)

then the dagger 'alif is (properly) displayed above the
shadda, but it's not high enough. Now the dagger 'alif overwrites the shadda. It needs some air.

More serious: If you enter the sequence

0644  (laam)
0651  (shadda)
0670  (dagger 'alif)
0647  (haa')

(a sequence that appears in the name of God) then you should see laam, with shadda on top, with dagger 'alif
on top of the shadda, followed by a final-form-glyph haa' connected to the laam.

But what you see now is an isolated-form-glyph haa', not
connected to the previous laam.  This is not acceptable.
The presence of the dagger 'alif is somehow blocking
the proper linking of the laam to the haa'.

Note that for the sequence

0644  (laam)
0651  (shadda)
064E  (fatHa)
0647  (haa')

the laam _is_ properly linked to the haa'.  So however the
fatHa is currently encoded/rendered, the dagger 'alif should
be done the same way to get better rendering.


Ken

ken.beesley aT xrce DoT xerox DoT com




_______________________________________________
General mailing list
General at arabeyes dot org
http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general

--- End Message ---