> I'm not sure if you are asking for a
change in the Qur'an itself rather
> than in the Unicode because it includes tanween in the wrong order or
> not but don't expect Muslims to change the Qur'an because it's wrong.
> than in the Unicode because it includes tanween in the wrong order or
> not but don't expect Muslims to change the Qur'an because it's wrong.
Mohammed, please stop this game of hiding
behind the millions. I am just pointing out that in Classical and Qur'anic
Arabic the place for tanween is on the last letter of the word proper. All your
examples illustrate that: not a single one has fathatan on top of alif. Your
example of /mukhtalifa-n/ (erroneously spelled with fathatan on top of the alif:
مختلفاً) falls right in line:
> About contemporary Arabic, it's
Unicode's duty to allow people to type text
> that conforms to the rules of Arabic which in turn is specified and
> maintained by Arabic(noun not adjective) organizations like "Mogammah
> Allogha Al-Arabia".
> that conforms to the rules of Arabic which in turn is specified and
> maintained by Arabic(noun not adjective) organizations like "Mogammah
> Allogha Al-Arabia".
Does this body also specify the spelling of
the Qur'an?
> It's not Unicode that dictates the rules of Arabic and if it did, it would
> be not usable at all in all Arabic countries (You cannot make a formal
> document, for example, that has Arabic rules differing from the currently
> used Arabic and expect it to be accepted).
Unicode does not dictate, it specifies a protocol for plain text
communication over networks. Its implementation is voluntary - the proliferation
of non-Unicode Qur'ans illustrates that. It is an International Agreement
resulting from long and intensive discussions. Individual specialists,
organisations, Industries, and national governments take part in it. It would be
very good to have an Arab state participating in this process.
> This is not to say that I'm against the need to be able to use
old
> Arabic, but I'm merely saying that contemporary Arabic is
much
> more important and if one has to choose between them, it is
not
> appropriate to choose old Arabic.
I fully agree, but isn't the Arabic of the Qur'an over 1400 years old?
I fully agree, but isn't the Arabic of the Qur'an over 1400 years old?
> > As a general remark I would like to point out that, due to the by
> > definition conservative character (sic!) of Industry Standards, there is no
> > hope in the world of getting a structurally clean solution for Qur'anic
> > Arabic - or even for Arabic at large.
> But we have to try to do that and not just say that it is not
> possible and there is nothing we can do.
> I'm sure you agree with me here.
I agree. What I am saying all the time is that - with some extra effort -
it is very well possible even within the constraints of the present Arabic Block
in Unicode. But to get good looking result, you need Unicode compatible font
technology.
> > The reason is, that none of the
> > Arabic encoding patterns or font designs were researched by and for
> > scholars and calligraphers, but by employees of engineering companies with
> > the short term commercial objective of arabizing as cheaply and as fast as
> > possible whatever product they had that was originally made on the
> > assumption that Latin characters rule the world. It was from the junk yard
> > of trashed legacy code patterns that Unicode picked its Arabic code.
>
> This is changing now, a lot of scholars now have some kind of computer
> knowledge and they can do a lot in this area.
> But even if there aren't any, we can still request their help.
> Actually, this proposal is based on their suggestions/help either using
> their writings or asking them directly.
Well, that is a positive development. Just make sure your sources also have
some idea of text representation in the light of computer technology.
> > The only possibility to accomplish a robust solution for encoding the
> > Qur'an - or any Classical Arabic for that matter - in the Unicode format
> > would be designing a code set from scratch and apply for it's inclusion in
> > the second plain as Historic or Diachronic Arabic.
>
> But today, contemporary Arabic is used, not historic Arabic
That is because the large mass of the Arabic literary legacy remains
unpublished - and unpublishable with the present level of development and
implementation of Unicode.
> > This is exactly what I
> > am working on, including the conversion schemes to upgrade the Arabic
> > industrial rubbish in Unicode or interchange with it.
> I'm afraid your goal "which I really appreciate btw" is different than mine.
> My goal is to make Unicode able to render the hard-copy of the Qur'an
> certified by all related Islamic organizations today.
> My goal is to make Unicode compliant with the current Arabic so that we
> can use it.
This is my short term goal, too. There is one difference: I can do it
already.
> For example, the small letters issue, I can send you a scan of a snippet
> from the last pages of most Qur'an printings that is popular today.
> You will notice that the first small letter noted is small alif followed by
> the rest of those small letters.
> You will also notice that the small yeh which is encoded in Unicode as
> U+06E6 is not only used as a trailing yeh but also can be used in
> the middle of words.
106 "Quraish" verse number 2: إِۦلَـٰفِهِمۡ
> As you can see, it's not a word-final only character.
That is a good example that contradicts my description. Thanks.
> But I can understand now that you are not considering the hard-copy
> used today standard and as such, your goal is different from mine.
You understanding of my goals is not completely correct. I fully understand
the importance of supporting the modern standard Qur'an and I am working on
it.
t
