Re: recent Quran proposal/discussion

[Nadim Shaikli <shaikli at yahoo dot com>]

--- Thomas Milo <t dot milo at chello dot nl> wrote:
> If you think Unicode should handle the script rendering instead, then
> you must realize that Unicode does not replace font technology and never
> will.

I don't think its a question of replacing, but Unicode is in control in
dictating what/how things ought to be done (the Bidi algorithm is a good
example).  I do want a certain thought to be addressed though (humor me :-)

Can we pursue a 2-pronged approach,

 1. Patch the current technology using today's existing framework
    (ie. the sub-optimal definitions and character sets) by adding
    the proposed characters.

 2. Pursue a more complete rendering engine change akin to what ACE is
    doing (along with alternations to the character set definitions for
    some characters would no longer be required/needed) to facilitate
    a truly correct framework.

As noted, I view step-2 as a longterm solution but we continue to need
the proposed characters (or subsets there-of and/or additional characters)
based on existing technologies to at a minimum attempt to standardize on
something until step-2 is adopted and is rolled out.

Does that sound reasonable ?  I realize step-1 might be loathed and/or
viewed as a waste of time and effort, but for a interim solution it seems
like a plausible short-term answer.

Hope that makes sense.

Salam.

 - Nadim



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/