[sword-devel] Unicode - was 1.52 & a request
Tue, 15 May 2001 08:21:30 -0400
I don't know the details of what's missing in Unicode for
support of Hebrew. There is a working group looking into it.
But if it's only one or two missing diacritics, they might
be able to get it added.
However, most browsers (and presumably other unicode display
software) don't handle combining unicode characters correctly.
So in practice, you can't display any hebrew characters with
diacritics in unicode, apart from those that are in there as
a single character.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of Paul Gear
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 7:34 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Unicode - was 1.52 & a request
> "Don A. Elbourne Jr." wrote:
> > Paul Gear wrote:
> > > A bit scary that something so long established as Hebrew would
> > > not even have a
> > > full set of diacritical marks in Unicode, eh? I wonder what
> > > others do for BHS?
> > BibleWorks and Logos both use their own TrueType fonts.
> Rick Brannan has told me in the past that Logos _already_ use Unicode
> internally. The fonts are not really the issue - i'm just curious
> as to how
> they could do so when some characters are apparently missing.
> Which ones are
> they, Harry?
> > The next version of
> > Logos will be shifting to Unicode, but I don't know what their
> plans are for
> > the moment considering the holes in Unicode Hebrew support.
> > ...
> Well, we know how good Titus' fonts are at present. Love those
> ugly fonts and
> square boxes for accents! :-]