Re: Sequential Fathatan Final Form (Items 9 and 10)

[Mohammed Yousif <mhdyousif at gmx dot net>]

On Wednesday 16 June 2004 19:07, Mete Kural wrote:
> Salaam Mohammed,
>
> >   I agree with you that since sequential fathatan
> > are only used
> >   in the Qur'an, the font can assume that the needed
> > character
> >   is the one in the image.
> >   But my point is that they have to consistent with
> > the regular
> >   fathatan.
> >   If I typed regular fathatan and then Alef, How can
> > the font
> >   decide if I want the form like in the image (where
> > the fathatan
> >   is as high as the end of the Alef), or the
> > expected form for
> >   regular text (where the fathatan is *just* above
> > the previous
> >   character not as high as the end of the Alef).
>
> The phenomenon you are referring to - the variance in
> the absolute positioning of superscript alef 

  You are confusing here, I'm not talking about the small alef, I'm talking
  about the last items in the proposal.

> - is not 
> a graphemic matter, it is a calligraphic matter. The
> typeface used in the King Fuad codex prefers to
> position the superscript alef there whereas in other
> codices the position the superscript alef may be
> slightly different, and in regular everyday Arabic
> text it can be just above the previous character.
> These are calligraphic style issues. Unicode does not
> encode calligraphic data, it encodes character data
> (or graphemic data).
>
> Font designers design different fonts for different
> calligraphic styles. There are fonts for Naskh - and
> there are many variances of Naskh - Nastaliq, Riqaa,
> Kufic, and other calligraphic styles. The difference
> between these calligraphic styles is not recorded at
> the encoding level (i.e. Unicode level). These
> differences are recorded at the font level (i.e. the
> rendering domain). Unicode is not meant for encoding
> calligraphic data.
>

  Then why Unicode encoded small Yeh as two characters?

> In order to render Unicode Quran text 'exactly' like
> the popular Quran mushaf that you find in your home
> (King Fuad or the handwritten clone printed by
> QuranComplex) you have to design a font typeface that
> is exactly like it. And this typeface will have
> differences from the typefaces found in the Ottoman,
> Maghribi, or Rushdi Quran mushafs.
>
> Personally for me, it is not crucial to design a
> typeface that is exactly like the King Fuad mushaf.
> The Quran is not dependent on the calligraphic style
> used to write it, it is the content that matters most
> to me. But I also see value in designing a typeface
> that is like the King Fuad Quran since that is what
> people are familiar with.
>

  I'm with you here but that really has nothing to do with
  the problem of getting either a small Alef as a mark or a small
  Alef as a base character. (Please discuss this in the other thread)

  But anyway, this is not the issue here, I'm talking about how one
  can differentiate between the last proposed characters used by the
  Qur'an (any style of it) and the one used by the regular text
  I'm repeating it here for clarity:
> >   If I typed regular fathatan and then Alef, How can
> > the font
> >   decide if I want the form like in the image (where
> > the fathatan
> >   is as high as the end of the Alef), or the
> > expected form for
> >   regular text (where the fathatan is *just* above
> > the previous
> >   character not as high as the end of the Alef).

>
> I understand. Yes the need to encode the Quran in
> Unicode is also an extremely important issue for me
> too. Insha'Allah we can propose a proper solution to
> this problem together.
>

  I'm hoping so, but please try 

-- 
Mohammed Yousif
Egypt