On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Philipp Reichmuth wrote:
> The discussion was more on grounds of "look at all the pretty things the
> Arabs have got". :-(
Weird, were they involved with Persian typography? Few Persian
typographers call those things pretty. They consider ligatures disruptive
when one's reading the text, and a few popular Persian fonts don't even
include the Lam-Alef ligature, which Unicode calls obligatory
(fortunately, OpenType Layout allows such fonts).
> Apart from that, Nastaliq and Shekaste typography aren't ligatureless,
> but the Naskhi ligatures from the Presentation Forms A block wouldn't
> have helped a lot, either.
No they aren't, but I call them calligraphy instead of typography. But
you're right, I meant Naskh ligatures. Arabic typography uses Naskh
ligatures frequently, but only few Persian books do so.
roozbeh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Aug 08 2002 - 17:42:40 EDT