Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 06:22:13 +0200
As nobody seems to share my exasperation
about damma, dammatan, damma with dot
being encoded a second time,
let's move on.
I had always hoped that "locale" would
solve "my" problems, had hoped that there
would be locale like "pak-quran," "nigeria-quran"
"panarab-quran" or "quran-qalun", and that
intelligent software and well informed font
designers would do all the tricks necessary.
Now I see that -- in the absence of locales
for Arabic script wolof
for ajami or
for Arabic script fula --
locale shapes of Arabic characters have been
encoded a second time, I want to ask:
What are the chances for encoding
variants of Arabic letters that
are indispensable for the printing
a locally appropriate editions of
the Qur'an?
On the picture from an edition by the King Fahd
complex for the printing of the Holy Qur'an you
can see both Western shapes of damma, and
Western Quranic shape of
ARABIC LETTER YEH WITH HAMZA ABOVE (U+0626)
As you can see there are two clear
differences two the normal shape of the letter:
-- the dots are not discarded
(the hamza is placed between the two dots)
-- the hamza sits below
(because there is a kasra too).
On one level it is the same character as
the one already encoded.
On an other level it looks VERY different
and the local community only accepts this
shape -- otherwise the Saudi institution
would not have bothered too produce this
fine locally appropriate version of the
Holy Qur'an.
Should ARABIC LETTER YEH WITH TWO DOTS
AND HAMZA BELOW be encoded?
Michael
