[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tanween variants and Unicode
- To: General Arabization Discussion <general at arabeyes dot org>
- Subject: Re: Tanween variants and Unicode
- From: Nadim Shaikli <shaikli at yahoo dot com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=dwi5ge9T4hRTyCQ3Vk19EBVofcZjMSTj8PA9TmkuuedK49ziFwdEovykpgw4qsFNwarKkDKhZXPNma2q9wRtvdY8OXKVh8OZLMDs7mepOfLJnhzc8Wnh1LPHTyr5JOFohDdr2Q2yZ3AQ9Ie/18YaLsYBFW4AHrhz90wZfVk9inA= ;
--- Gregg Reynolds <gar at arabink dot com> wrote:
> Nadim Shaikli wrote:
> ...
> > You can do whatever substitution you like and/or even spec those out if
> > you so desire, but at a minimum (and humor me here) the new scripts need
> > their own codepoint (like for sequential fathatan, etc). We need this
>
> You lost me there. What do you mean by "the new scripts"? Do you mean
> "the new codepoints"?
I mean the currently missing characters/glyphs - akin to "assimilated tanween"
(thus the 'sequential fathatan' mention).
Salam.
- Nadim
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com