I've a version of Amiri font that works with Firefox as well (still have
to test it on Windows), I can send it to if you want to test it (though
my number sign handles up to 3 digits only, but if this is wrong I’m
happy to extend it).
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 02:11:18PM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> I made a browser test page for this issue:
> http://persianintexas.persian-computing.ir/persoarabicyear/ > persoarabicyearsigns.html
> Although I followed the instructions on the SIL website, the @fontface is not
> apparently working.
> You are supposed to see it in Arabic Typesetting font (all Windows users) or
> otherwise, it should access the Scheherazade font placed in the same folder.
> Not sure what went wrong.
> Currently these symbols seem to only work if you're on Windows and IE.
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 01:28:52AM -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > On 2012-05-31, at 12:58 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 04:29:03AM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > >> ¹ only end of ayah not the others, but since they all share the same
> > >> lookup, I suspect it is a Unicode properties issue on Firefox side.
> This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will break feature
> files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much we can do
> here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to FontForge’s feature
> file code since the last release.
Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly handle these
sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe, try to see if I can
figure out what it's doing.
Khaled,
Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The latest
version from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox. Amiri is
nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and therefore, much
more suitable for web use than the others. (However, for this particular
project, unfortunately, I won't be able to use it since the Heh Goal is not
the right shape to match the old style manuscript.)
I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL which say
how many digits the font allows:
http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using "Arabic Number
Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic Sign
Samvat" will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at least
for me in this project.
-Connie
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org> wrote:
> On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will break feature
> > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much we can do
> > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to FontForge’s feature
> > file code since the last release.
> Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly handle these
> sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe, try to see if I
> can
> figure out what it's doing.
Khaled,
Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox. All 4
digits are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the
right-most digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic
Number Sign a bit. But no big deal.
I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need to be
taken up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > Khaled,
> > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The latest
> version
> > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
> File attached.
> > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
> > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too small
> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use the
> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be able
> > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the old
> > style manuscript.)
> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in Unicode
> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example, it is
> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher writing
> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other language
> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or Farsi
> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers writing in
> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style font,
> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts in
> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL which say
> how
> > many digits the font allows:
> > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using "Arabic
> Number
> > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic Sign
> Samvat"
> > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at least for
> me in
> > this project.
> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of the
> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly lead
> to its
> inclusion do not say much about it:
> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number” which
> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> Regards,
> Khaled
> > -Connie
> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org>
> wrote:
> > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will break
> feature
> > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much we can
> do
> > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to FontForge’s
> feature
> > > file code since the last release.
> > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly handle
> these
> > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe, try to
> see if I
> > can
> > figure out what it's doing.
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> Khaled,
> Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The latest version
> from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
File attached.
> Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
> therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too small
compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use the
same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be able
> to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the old
> style manuscript.)
This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in Unicode
are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example, it is
a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher writing
Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other language
using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or Farsi
Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers writing in
Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style font,
I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts in
Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL which say how
> many digits the font allows:
> http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using "Arabic Number
> Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic Sign Samvat"
> will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at least for me in
> this project.
The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of the
Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly lead to its
inclusion do not say much about it:
http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number” which
does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org> wrote:
> On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will break feature
> > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much we can do
> > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to FontForge’s feature
> > file code since the last release.
> Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly handle these
> sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe, try to see if I
> can
> figure out what it's doing.
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 11:46:13AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> Khaled,
> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox. All 4 digits
> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the right-most
> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic Number Sign a
> bit. But no big deal.
> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need to be taken
> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
>
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > Khaled,
> > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The latest
> version
> > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
> File attached.
> > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
> > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too small
> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use the
> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be able
> > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the old
> > style manuscript.)
> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in Unicode
> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example, it is
> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher writing
> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other language
> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or Farsi
> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers writing in
> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style font,
> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts in
> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL which say
> how
> > many digits the font allows:
> > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using "Arabic
> Number
> > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic Sign
> Samvat"
> > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at least for
> me in
> > this project.
> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of the
> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly lead to
> its
> inclusion do not say much about it:
> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number” which
> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> Regards,
> Khaled
> > -Connie
> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org>
> wrote:
> > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will break
> feature
> > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much we can
> do
> > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to FontForge’s
> feature
> > > file code since the last release.
> > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly handle
> these
> > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe, try to see
> if I
> > can
> > figure out what it's doing.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org> wrote:
> Thanks, I fixed the eight issue.
> Regards,
> Khaled
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 11:46:13AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > Khaled,
> > Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox. All 4
> digits
> > are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the
> right-most
> > digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic Number
> Sign a
> > bit. But no big deal.
> > I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need to be
> taken
> > up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
> > On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > > Khaled,
> > > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The
> latest
> > version
> > > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
> > File attached.
> > > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
> > > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
> > That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too small
> > compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use
> the
> > same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> > > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be
> able
> > > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the
> old
> > > style manuscript.)
> > This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in
> Unicode
> > are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
> > commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example, it
> is
> > a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher writing
> > Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other
> language
> > using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or
> Farsi
> > Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers writing
> in
> > Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style
> font,
> > I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
> > design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts
> in
> > Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> > > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL
> which say
> > how
> > > many digits the font allows:
> > > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > > > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using "Arabic
> > Number
> > > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic
> Sign
> > Samvat"
> > > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at
> least for
> > me in
> > > this project.
> > The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of
> the
> > Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly
> lead to
> > its
> > inclusion do not say much about it:
> > http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
> > This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number”
> which
> > does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
> > digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
> > http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> > Regards,
> > Khaled
> > > -Connie
> > > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <
> beh...@behdad.org>
> > wrote:
> > > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will
> break
> > feature
> > > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much
> we can
> > do
> > > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to
> FontForge’s
> > feature
> > > > file code since the last release.
> > > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly
> handle
> > these
> > > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe, try
> to see
> > if I
> > > can
> > > figure out what it's doing.
> Khaled,
> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox. All 4 digits
> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the right-most
> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic Number Sign a
> bit. But no big deal.
> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need to be taken
> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org
> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > Khaled,
> > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The latest
> version
> > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
> File attached.
> > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
> > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too small
> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use the
> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be able
> > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the old
> > style manuscript.)
> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in Unicode
> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example, it is
> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher writing
> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other language
> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or Farsi
> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers writing in
> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style font,
> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts in
> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL which say how
> > many digits the font allows:
> > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using "Arabic Number
> > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic Sign
> Samvat"
> > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at least for
> me in
> > this project.
> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of the
> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly lead
> to its
> inclusion do not say much about it:
> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number” which
> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> Regards,
> Khaled
> > -Connie
> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org
> <mailto:beh...@behdad.org>> wrote:
> > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will break
> feature
> > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much we can do
> > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to FontForge’s
> feature
> > > file code since the last release.
> > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly handle
> these
> > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe, try to
> see if I
> > can
> > figure out what it's doing.
I think I now have a solution to this problem. You can use 'rtlm'/'ltrm' to
choose different behavior based on the direction the shaper ended up appyling
features. You may want to apply your font.
> I still have no idea how to fix it in HarfBuzz without breaking other stuff...
> On 06/04/2012 02:16 AM, Connie Bobroff wrote:
>> Khaled,
>> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox. All 4 digits
>> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the right-most
>> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic Number Sign a
>> bit. But no big deal.
>> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need to be taken
>> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org
>> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
>> > Khaled,
>> > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The latest
>> version
>> > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
>> File attached.
>> > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
>> > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
>> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too small
>> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use the
>> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
>> > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be able
>> > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the old
>> > style manuscript.)
>> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in Unicode
>> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
>> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example, it is
>> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher writing
>> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other language
>> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or Farsi
>> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers writing in
>> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style font,
>> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
>> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts in
>> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
>> > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL which say how
>> > many digits the font allows:
>> > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts >> > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using "Arabic Number
>> > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic Sign
>> Samvat"
>> > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at least for
>> me in
>> > this project.
>> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of the
>> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly lead
>> to its
>> inclusion do not say much about it:
>> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
>> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number” which
>> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
>> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
>> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
>> Regards,
>> Khaled
>> > -Connie
>> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org
>> <mailto:beh...@behdad.org>> wrote:
>> > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
>> > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will break
>> feature
>> > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much we can do
>> > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to FontForge’s
>> feature
>> > > file code since the last release.
>> > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly handle
>> these
>> > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe, try to
>> see if I
>> > can
>> > figure out what it's doing.
Hi Everyone,
Good news: Behdad has added Amiri to the Google web fonts.
http://persian.nmelrc.org/poetry/JangNaame2.html See Line 14.
Although the Arabic Number Sign digits are somehow a bit squished, Firefox
users (at least on Windows, not sure about Mac...) can now see the year and
signs properly aligned vertically.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org> wrote:
> Khaled,
> I think I now have a solution to this problem. You can use 'rtlm'/'ltrm'
> to
> choose different behavior based on the direction the shaper ended up
> appyling
> features. You may want to apply your font.
> Let me know if this works.
> behdad
> On 06/11/2012 09:01 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > BTW, I came across this picture from six years ago, before Unicode had
> fixed
> > the bidi category of the Arabic number sign:
> > I still have no idea how to fix it in HarfBuzz without breaking other
> stuff...
> > On 06/04/2012 02:16 AM, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> >> Khaled,
> >> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox. All 4
> digits
> >> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the
> right-most
> >> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic Number
> Sign a
> >> bit. But no big deal.
> >> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need to be
> taken
> >> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
> >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org
> >> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> >> > Khaled,
> >> > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The
> latest
> >> version
> >> > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
> >> File attached.
> >> > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
> >> > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
> >> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too
> small
> >> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use
> the
> >> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> >> > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be
> able
> >> > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the
> old
> >> > style manuscript.)
> >> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in
> Unicode
> >> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
> >> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example,
> it is
> >> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher
> writing
> >> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other
> language
> >> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or
> Farsi
> >> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers
> writing in
> >> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style
> font,
> >> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
> >> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts
> in
> >> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> >> > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL
> which say how
> >> > many digits the font allows:
> >> > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > >> > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using
> "Arabic Number
> >> > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic
> Sign
> >> Samvat"
> >> > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at
> least for
> >> me in
> >> > this project.
> >> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of
> the
> >> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly
> lead
> >> to its
> >> inclusion do not say much about it:
> >> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
> >> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number”
> which
> >> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
> >> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
> >> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> >> Regards,
> >> Khaled
> >> > -Connie
> >> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <
> beh...@behdad.org
> >> <mailto:beh...@behdad.org>> wrote:
> >> > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> >> > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will
> break
> >> feature
> >> > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much
> we can do
> >> > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to
> FontForge’s
> >> feature
> >> > > file code since the last release.
> >> > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly
> handle
> >> these
> >> > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe,
> try to
> >> see if I
> >> > can
> >> > figure out what it's doing.
On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 09:17:04AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> Good news: Behdad has added Amiri to the Google web fonts.
> http://persian.nmelrc.org/poetry/JangNaame2.html > See Line 14.
> Although the Arabic Number Sign digits are somehow a bit squished, Firefox
> users (at least on Windows, not sure about Mac...) can now see the year and
> signs properly aligned vertically.
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org> wrote:
> > Khaled,
> > I think I now have a solution to this problem. You can use 'rtlm'/'ltrm'
> > to
> > choose different behavior based on the direction the shaper ended up
> > appyling
> > features. You may want to apply your font.
> > Let me know if this works.
> > behdad
> > On 06/11/2012 09:01 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > > BTW, I came across this picture from six years ago, before Unicode had
> > fixed
> > > the bidi category of the Arabic number sign:
> > > I still have no idea how to fix it in HarfBuzz without breaking other
> > stuff...
> > > On 06/04/2012 02:16 AM, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > >> Khaled,
> > >> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox. All 4
> > digits
> > >> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the
> > right-most
> > >> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic Number
> > Sign a
> > >> bit. But no big deal.
> > >> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need to be
> > taken
> > >> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
> > >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org
> > >> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > >> > Khaled,
> > >> > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The
> > latest
> > >> version
> > >> > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
> > >> File attached.
> > >> > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
> > >> > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
> > >> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too
> > small
> > >> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use
> > the
> > >> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> > >> > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be
> > able
> > >> > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the
> > old
> > >> > style manuscript.)
> > >> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in
> > Unicode
> > >> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
> > >> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example,
> > it is
> > >> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher
> > writing
> > >> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other
> > language
> > >> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or
> > Farsi
> > >> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers
> > writing in
> > >> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style
> > font,
> > >> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
> > >> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts
> > in
> > >> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> > >> > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL
> > which say how
> > >> > many digits the font allows:
> > >> > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > > >> > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using
> > "Arabic Number
> > >> > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic
> > Sign
> > >> Samvat"
> > >> > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at
> > least for
> > >> me in
> > >> > this project.
> > >> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of
> > the
> > >> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly
> > lead
> > >> to its
> > >> inclusion do not say much about it:
> > >> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
> > >> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number”
> > which
> > >> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
> > >> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
> > >> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Khaled
> > >> > -Connie
> > >> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <
> > beh...@behdad.org
> > >> <mailto:beh...@behdad.org>> wrote:
> > >> > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > >> > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will
> > break
> > >> feature
> > >> > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much
> > we can do
> > >> > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to
> > FontForge’s
> > >> feature
> > >> > > file code since the last release.
> > >> > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly
> > handle
> > >> these
> > >> > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe,
> > try to
> > >> see if I
> > >> > can
> > >> > figure out what it's doing.
Khaled,
Thanks for the update. I installed the new version and the numbers look
very nice now in the appropriate size. Now we just need to get Behdad to
update the Google web font, <hint> <hint>!
A for the new Gaf, I'm not sure I like it. See what the others say. For
example,
کک
(means "flea" in Persian) looks a little strange to my eye.
Again, thanks for all this. It's great to have this font.
> P.S. Persian readers will probably appreciate the new, Nastaliqish,
> design of Gaf, instead of the old, more Naskhi but unconventional, one.
> On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 09:17:04AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> > Good news: Behdad has added Amiri to the Google web fonts.
> > http://persian.nmelrc.org/poetry/JangNaame2.html > > See Line 14.
> > Although the Arabic Number Sign digits are somehow a bit squished,
> Firefox
> > users (at least on Windows, not sure about Mac...) can now see the year
> and
> > signs properly aligned vertically.
> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org>
> wrote:
> > > Khaled,
> > > I think I now have a solution to this problem. You can use
> 'rtlm'/'ltrm'
> > > to
> > > choose different behavior based on the direction the shaper ended up
> > > appyling
> > > features. You may want to apply your font.
> > > Let me know if this works.
> > > behdad
> > > On 06/11/2012 09:01 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > > > BTW, I came across this picture from six years ago, before Unicode
> had
> > > fixed
> > > > the bidi category of the Arabic number sign:
> > > > I still have no idea how to fix it in HarfBuzz without breaking other
> > > stuff...
> > > > On 06/04/2012 02:16 AM, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > > >> Khaled,
> > > >> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox.
> All 4
> > > digits
> > > >> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the
> > > right-most
> > > >> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic
> Number
> > > Sign a
> > > >> bit. But no big deal.
> > > >> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need
> to be
> > > taken
> > > >> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
> > > >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <
> khaledho...@eglug.org
> > > >> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
> > > >> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > > >> > Khaled,
> > > >> > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox.
> The
> > > latest
> > > >> version
> > > >> > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
> > > >> File attached.
> > > >> > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma
> and
> > > >> > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
> > > >> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too
> > > small
> > > >> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to
> use
> > > the
> > > >> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> > > >> > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't
> be
> > > able
> > > >> > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match
> the
> > > old
> > > >> > style manuscript.)
> > > >> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in
> > > Unicode
> > > >> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic
> style
> > > >> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an
> example,
> > > it is
> > > >> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher
> > > writing
> > > >> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other
> > > language
> > > >> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or
> > > Farsi
> > > >> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers
> > > writing in
> > > >> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh
> style
> > > font,
> > > >> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match
> the
> > > >> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of
> manuscripts
> > > in
> > > >> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> > > >> > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL
> > > which say how
> > > >> > many digits the font allows:
> http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > > > >> > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using
> > > "Arabic Number
> > > >> > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume
> "Arabic
> > > Sign
> > > >> Samvat"
> > > >> > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at
> > > least for
> > > >> me in
> > > >> > this project.
> > > >> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended
> use of
> > > the
> > > >> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that
> supposedly
> > > lead
> > > >> to its
> > > >> inclusion do not say much about it:
> > > >> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
> > > >> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a
> number”
> > > which
> > > >> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary
> number
> > > >> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
> > > >> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >> Khaled
> > > >> > -Connie
> > > >> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <
> > > beh...@behdad.org
> > > >> <mailto:beh...@behdad.org>> wrote:
> > > >> > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > > >> > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it
> will
> > > break
> > > >> feature
> > > >> > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not
> much
> > > we can do
> > > >> > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to
> > > FontForge’s
> > > >> feature
> > > >> > > file code since the last release.
> > > >> > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to
> correctly
> > > handle
> > > >> these
> > > >> > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe,
> > > try to
> > > >> see if I
> > > >> > can
> > > >> > figure out what it's doing.
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:23:16AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > Khaled,
> > Thanks for the update. I installed the new version and the numbers look
> > very nice now in the appropriate size. Now we just need to get Behdad to
> > update the Google web font, <hint> <hint>!
> This is just a snapshot, there probably will be a new release before the
> end of the month.
> > A for the new Gaf, I'm not sure I like it. See what the others say. For
> > example,
> > کک
> > (means "flea" in Persian) looks a little strange to my eye.
> That is actually the old form, seems I missed some contextual form. It
> should have been looked like کک.
> Regards,
> Khaled
> > Again, thanks for all this. It's great to have this font.
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org>
> wrote:
> > > Hi Connie,
> > > It have been a while, but next version of Amiri will make the number
> > > sign digits of the same size as year sign ones, you can test it from
> > > here:
> > > http://khaledhosny.org/files/tmp/amiri-0.106.tar.bz2
> > > Regards,
> > > Khaled
> > > P.S. Persian readers will probably appreciate the new, Nastaliqish,
> > > design of Gaf, instead of the old, more Naskhi but unconventional, one.
> > > On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 09:17:04AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > > > Hi Everyone,
> > > > Good news: Behdad has added Amiri to the Google web fonts.
> > > > http://persian.nmelrc.org/poetry/JangNaame2.html > > > > See Line 14.
> > > > Although the Arabic Number Sign digits are somehow a bit squished,
> > > Firefox
> > > > users (at least on Windows, not sure about Mac...) can now see the
> year
> > > and
> > > > signs properly aligned vertically.
> > > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > Khaled,
> > > > > I think I now have a solution to this problem. You can use
> > > 'rtlm'/'ltrm'
> > > > > to
> > > > > choose different behavior based on the direction the shaper ended
> up
> > > > > appyling
> > > > > features. You may want to apply your font.
> > > > > Let me know if this works.
> > > > > behdad
> > > > > On 06/11/2012 09:01 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > > > > > BTW, I came across this picture from six years ago, before
> Unicode
> > > had
> > > > > fixed
> > > > > > the bidi category of the Arabic number sign:
> > > > > > I still have no idea how to fix it in HarfBuzz without breaking
> other
> > > > > stuff...
> > > > > > On 06/04/2012 02:16 AM, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > > > > >> Khaled,
> > > > > >> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on
> Firefox.
> > > All 4
> > > > > digits
> > > > > >> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the
> > > > > right-most
> > > > > >> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic
> > > Number
> > > > > Sign a
> > > > > >> bit. But no big deal.
> > > > > >> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues,
> need
> > > to be
> > > > > taken
> > > > > >> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
> > > > > >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <
> > > khaledho...@eglug.org
> > > > > >> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
> > > > > >> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff
> wrote:
> > > > > >> > Khaled,
> > > > > >> > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on
> Firefox.
> > > The
> > > > > latest
> > > > > >> version
> > > > > >> > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
> > > > > >> File attached.
> > > > > >> > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as
> Tahoma
> > > and
> > > > > >> > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
> > > > > >> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously
> too
> > > > > small
> > > > > >> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it
> impossible to
> > > use
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> > > > > >> > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I
> won't
> > > be
> > > > > able
> > > > > >> > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to
> match
> > > the
> > > > > old
> > > > > >> > style manuscript.)
> > > > > >> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic
> letters in
> > > > > Unicode
> > > > > >> are really stylistic variants specific to certain
> calligraphic
> > > style
> > > > > >> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an
> > > example,
> > > > > it is
> > > > > >> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a
> calligrapher
> > > > > writing
> > > > > >> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any
> other
> > > > > language
> > > > > >> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called
> Keheh or
> > > > > Farsi
> > > > > >> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers
> > > > > writing in
> > > > > >> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh
> > > style
> > > > > font,
> > > > > >> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not
> match
> > > the
> > > > > >> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of
> > > manuscripts
> > > > > in
> > > > > >> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> > > > > >> > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features"
> on SIL
> > > > > which say how
> > > > > >> > many digits the font allows:
> > > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > > > > > >> > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about
> using
> > > > > "Arabic Number
> > > > > >> > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume
> > > "Arabic
> > > > > Sign
> > > > > >> Samvat"
> > > > > >> > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong
> shape at
> > > > > least for
> > > > > >> me in
> > > > > >> > this project.
> > > > > >> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended
> > > use of
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that
> > > supposedly
> > > > > lead
> > > > > >> to its
> > > > > >> inclusion do not say much about it:
> > > > > >> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
> > > > > >> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a
> > > number”
> > > > > which
> > > > > >> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary
> > > number
> > > > > >> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4
> digits:
> > > > > >> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> > > > > >> > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > > > > >> > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch,
> it
> > > will
> > > > > break
> > > > > >> feature
> > > > > >> > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is
> not
> > > much
> > > > > we can do
> > > > > >> > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to
> > > > > FontForge’s
> > > > > >> feature
> > > > > >> > > file code since the last release.
> > > > > >> > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to
> > > correctly
> > > > > handle
> > > > > >> these
> > > > > >> > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with
> Uniscribe,
> > > > > try to
> > > > > >> see if I
> > > > > >> > can
> > > > > >> > figure out what it's doing.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:23:16AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> Khaled,
> Thanks for the update. I installed the new version and the numbers look
> very nice now in the appropriate size. Now we just need to get Behdad to
> update the Google web font, <hint> <hint>!
This is just a snapshot, there probably will be a new release before the
end of the month.
> A for the new Gaf, I'm not sure I like it. See what the others say. For
> example,
> کک
> (means "flea" in Persian) looks a little strange to my eye.
That is actually the old form, seems I missed some contextual form. It
should have been looked like کک.
> Again, thanks for all this. It's great to have this font.
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org> wrote:
> > Hi Connie,
> > It have been a while, but next version of Amiri will make the number
> > sign digits of the same size as year sign ones, you can test it from
> > here:
> > http://khaledhosny.org/files/tmp/amiri-0.106.tar.bz2
> > Regards,
> > Khaled
> > P.S. Persian readers will probably appreciate the new, Nastaliqish,
> > design of Gaf, instead of the old, more Naskhi but unconventional, one.
> > On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 09:17:04AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > > Hi Everyone,
> > > Good news: Behdad has added Amiri to the Google web fonts.
> > > http://persian.nmelrc.org/poetry/JangNaame2.html > > > See Line 14.
> > > Although the Arabic Number Sign digits are somehow a bit squished,
> > Firefox
> > > users (at least on Windows, not sure about Mac...) can now see the year
> > and
> > > signs properly aligned vertically.
> > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > Khaled,
> > > > I think I now have a solution to this problem. You can use
> > 'rtlm'/'ltrm'
> > > > to
> > > > choose different behavior based on the direction the shaper ended up
> > > > appyling
> > > > features. You may want to apply your font.
> > > > Let me know if this works.
> > > > behdad
> > > > On 06/11/2012 09:01 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > > > > BTW, I came across this picture from six years ago, before Unicode
> > had
> > > > fixed
> > > > > the bidi category of the Arabic number sign:
> > > > > I still have no idea how to fix it in HarfBuzz without breaking other
> > > > stuff...
> > > > > On 06/04/2012 02:16 AM, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > > > >> Khaled,
> > > > >> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox.
> > All 4
> > > > digits
> > > > >> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the
> > > > right-most
> > > > >> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic
> > Number
> > > > Sign a
> > > > >> bit. But no big deal.
> > > > >> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need
> > to be
> > > > taken
> > > > >> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
> > > > >> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <
> > khaledho...@eglug.org
> > > > >> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
> > > > >> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > > > >> > Khaled,
> > > > >> > Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox.
> > The
> > > > latest
> > > > >> version
> > > > >> > from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
> > > > >> File attached.
> > > > >> > Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma
> > and
> > > > >> > therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
> > > > >> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too
> > > > small
> > > > >> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to
> > use
> > > > the
> > > > >> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
> > > > >> > (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't
> > be
> > > > able
> > > > >> > to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match
> > the
> > > > old
> > > > >> > style manuscript.)
> > > > >> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in
> > > > Unicode
> > > > >> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic
> > style
> > > > >> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an
> > example,
> > > > it is
> > > > >> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher
> > > > writing
> > > > >> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other
> > > > language
> > > > >> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or
> > > > Farsi
> > > > >> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers
> > > > writing in
> > > > >> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh
> > style
> > > > font,
> > > > >> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match
> > the
> > > > >> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of
> > manuscripts
> > > > in
> > > > >> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
> > > > >> > I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL
> > > > which say how
> > > > >> > many digits the font allows:
> > http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts > > > > >> > Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using
> > > > "Arabic Number
> > > > >> > Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume
> > "Arabic
> > > > Sign
> > > > >> Samvat"
> > > > >> > will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at
> > > > least for
> > > > >> me in
> > > > >> > this project.
> > > > >> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended
> > use of
> > > > the
> > > > >> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that
> > supposedly
> > > > lead
> > > > >> to its
> > > > >> inclusion do not say much about it:
> > > > >> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
> > > > >> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a
> > number”
> > > > which
> > > > >> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary
> > number
> > > > >> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
> > > > >> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
> > > > >> Regards,
> > > > >> Khaled
> > > > >> > -Connie
> > > > >> > On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <
> > > > beh...@behdad.org
> > > > >> <mailto:beh...@behdad.org>> wrote:
> > > > >> > On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > > > >> > > This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it
> > will
> > > > break
> > > > >> feature
> > > > >> > > files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not
> > much
> > > > we can do
> > > > >> > > here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to
> > > > FontForge’s
> > > > >> feature
> > > > >> > > file code since the last release.
> > > > >> > Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to
> > correctly
> > > > handle
> > > > >> these
> > > > >> > sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe,
> > > > try to
> > > > >> see if I
> > > > >> > can
> > > > >> > figure out what it's doing.
Although it's vastly ignored, but I vaguely remember from my school time that the proper use of Sarkash in final and single forms was 'either Sarkash or miniaturized sign'. Not both.
In pre-Roman Turkish notations, there seemed to be a form for Gaf following that logic.
But I didn't do a serious research really. I just picked up bits of informations here and there.
-behnam
On 2013-01-22, at 5:57 PM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org> wrote:
> P.S. Persian readers will probably appreciate the new, Nastaliqish,
> design of Gaf, instead of the old, more Naskhi but unconventional, one.
> On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 09:17:04AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
>> Hi Everyone,
>> Good news: Behdad has added Amiri to the Google web fonts.
>> http://persian.nmelrc.org/poetry/JangNaame2.html >> See Line 14.
>> Although the Arabic Number Sign digits are somehow a bit squished, Firefox
>> users (at least on Windows, not sure about Mac...) can now see the year and
>> signs properly aligned vertically.
>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org> wrote:
>>> Khaled,
>>> I think I now have a solution to this problem. You can use 'rtlm'/'ltrm'
>>> to
>>> choose different behavior based on the direction the shaper ended up
>>> appyling
>>> features. You may want to apply your font.
>>> Let me know if this works.
>>> behdad
>>> On 06/11/2012 09:01 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
>>>> BTW, I came across this picture from six years ago, before Unicode had
>>> fixed
>>>> the bidi category of the Arabic number sign:
>>>> I still have no idea how to fix it in HarfBuzz without breaking other
>>> stuff...
>>>> On 06/04/2012 02:16 AM, Connie Bobroff wrote:
>>>>> Khaled,
>>>>> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox. All 4
>>> digits
>>>>> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the
>>> right-most
>>>>> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic Number
>>> Sign a
>>>>> bit. But no big deal.
>>>>> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need to be
>>> taken
>>>>> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org
>>>>> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
>>>>>> Khaled,
>>>>>> Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The
>>> latest
>>>>> version
>>>>>> from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
>>>>> File attached.
>>>>>> Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
>>>>>> therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
>>>>> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too
>>> small
>>>>> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use
>>> the
>>>>> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
>>>>>> (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be
>>> able
>>>>>> to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the
>>> old
>>>>>> style manuscript.)
>>>>> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in
>>> Unicode
>>>>> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
>>>>> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example,
>>> it is
>>>>> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher
>>> writing
>>>>> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other
>>> language
>>>>> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or
>>> Farsi
>>>>> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers
>>> writing in
>>>>> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style
>>> font,
>>>>> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
>>>>> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts
>>> in
>>>>> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
>>>>>> I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL
>>> which say how
>>>>>> many digits the font allows:
>>>>>> http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts >>>>>> Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using
>>> "Arabic Number
>>>>>> Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic
>>> Sign
>>>>> Samvat"
>>>>>> will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at
>>> least for
>>>>> me in
>>>>>> this project.
>>>>> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of
>>> the
>>>>> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly
>>> lead
>>>>> to its
>>>>> inclusion do not say much about it:
>>>>> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
>>>>> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number”
>>> which
>>>>> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
>>>>> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
>>>>> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Khaled
>>>>>> -Connie
>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <
>>> beh...@behdad.org
>>>>> <mailto:beh...@behdad.org>> wrote:
>>>>>> On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
>>>>>>> This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will
>>> break
>>>>> feature
>>>>>>> files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much
>>> we can do
>>>>>>> here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to
>>> FontForge’s
>>>>> feature
>>>>>>> file code since the last release.
>>>>>> Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly
>>> handle
>>>>> these
>>>>>> sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe,
>>> try to
>>>>> see if I
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> figure out what it's doing.
I don't remember ever seeing a Gaf without sarkesh. That said, I remember
having seen Kaf with a Kafche *with* an extra stroke *underneath*, not above;
mostly in handwriting perhaps.
> Although it's vastly ignored, but I vaguely remember from my school time that
> the proper use of Sarkash in final and single forms was 'either Sarkash or
> miniaturized sign'. Not both.
> In pre-Roman Turkish notations, there seemed to be a form for Gaf following
> that logic.
> But I didn't do a serious research really. I just picked up bits of
> informations here and there.
> -behnam
> On 2013-01-22, at 5:57 PM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org
> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
>> Hi Connie,
>> It have been a while, but next version of Amiri will make the number
>> sign digits of the same size as year sign ones, you can test it from
>> here:
>> http://khaledhosny.org/files/tmp/amiri-0.106.tar.bz2
>> Regards,
>> Khaled
>> P.S. Persian readers will probably appreciate the new, Nastaliqish,
>> design of Gaf, instead of the old, more Naskhi but unconventional, one.
>> On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 09:17:04AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>> Good news: Behdad has added Amiri to the Google web fonts.
>>> http://persian.nmelrc.org/poetry/JangNaame2.html >>> See Line 14.
>>> Although the Arabic Number Sign digits are somehow a bit squished, Firefox
>>> users (at least on Windows, not sure about Mac...) can now see the year and
>>> signs properly aligned vertically.
>>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Behdad Esfahbod <beh...@behdad.org> wrote:
>>>> Khaled,
>>>> I think I now have a solution to this problem. You can use 'rtlm'/'ltrm'
>>>> to
>>>> choose different behavior based on the direction the shaper ended up
>>>> appyling
>>>> features. You may want to apply your font.
>>>> Let me know if this works.
>>>> behdad
>>>> On 06/11/2012 09:01 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
>>>>> BTW, I came across this picture from six years ago, before Unicode had
>>>> fixed
>>>>> the bidi category of the Arabic number sign:
>>>>> I still have no idea how to fix it in HarfBuzz without breaking other
>>>> stuff...
>>>>> On 06/04/2012 02:16 AM, Connie Bobroff wrote:
>>>>>> Khaled,
>>>>>> Thanks and congratulations. The new Amiri works great on Firefox. All 4
>>>> digits
>>>>>> are nicely above the Arabic Number Sign. (Just note that if the
>>>> right-most
>>>>>> digit is "8", the bottom, right portion collides with the Arabic Number
>>>> Sign a
>>>>>> bit. But no big deal.
>>>>>> I think the other points, many of which are critical issues, need to be
>>>> taken
>>>>>> up in a separate thread. Please hang on.
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org
>>>>>> <mailto:khaledho...@eglug.org>> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:26:47AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
>>>>>>> Khaled,
>>>>>>> Yes, please send the version of Amiri that works on Firefox. The
>>>> latest
>>>>>> version
>>>>>>> from SourceForge works very nicely on IE but not Firefox.
>>>>>> File attached.
>>>>>>> Amiri is nice in that it's relatively the same size as Tahoma and
>>>>>>> therefore, much more suitable for web use than the others.
>>>>>> That is by design, almost all Arabic fonts are ridiculously too
>>>> small
>>>>>> compared to Latin for reason beyond me, making it impossible to use
>>>> the
>>>>>> same point size for Arabic and non-Arabic text.
>>>>>>> (However, for this particular project, unfortunately, I won't be
>>>> able
>>>>>>> to use it since the Heh Goal is not the right shape to match the
>>>> old
>>>>>>> style manuscript.)
>>>>>> This was intentional, IMO many of the variant Arabic letters in
>>>> Unicode
>>>>>> are really stylistic variants specific to certain calligraphic style
>>>>>> commonly used for certain languages, Heh Goal is such an example,
>>>> it is
>>>>>> a Nastliq-style variant of the regular Heh and a calligrapher
>>>> writing
>>>>>> Heh this way will do so even when writing Arabic or any other
>>>> language
>>>>>> using Arabic script, the same applies for the so-called Keheh or
>>>> Farsi
>>>>>> Kaf which is really a Nastaliq Kaf, and Arabic calligraphers
>>>> writing in
>>>>>> Nastaliq use that very same Kaf. So for Amiri, being a Naskh style
>>>> font,
>>>>>> I decided that this variance makes no sense and does not match the
>>>>>> design so I ignored it, however if there is evidence of manuscripts
>>>> in
>>>>>> Naskh style making that distinction I'll happily follow it.
>>>>>>> I did not quite see until now these "Advanced Features" on SIL
>>>> which say how
>>>>>>> many digits the font allows:
>>>>>>> http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=ArabicFonts >>>>>>> Probably there should be a discussion somewhere about using
>>>> "Arabic Number
>>>>>>> Sign" for dates and therefore needing 4 digits. I presume "Arabic
>>>> Sign
>>>>>> Samvat"
>>>>>>> will be given 4 digits but as I said, it's the wrong shape at
>>>> least for
>>>>>> me in
>>>>>>> this project.
>>>>>> The problem is that I don’t really know what is the intended use of
>>>> the
>>>>>> Arabic number sign, the available Unicode proposals that supposedly
>>>> lead
>>>>>> to its
>>>>>> inclusion do not say much about it:
>>>>>> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2413.htm
>>>>>> This page says it is “used to indicate the beginning of a number”
>>>> which
>>>>>> does not say much either, but suggests it takes an arbitrary number
>>>>>> digits, so I extended Amiri’s number sign to accept 4 digits:
>>>>>> http://people.w3.org/rishida/scripts/urdu/
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Khaled
>>>>>>> -Connie
>>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <
>>>> beh...@behdad.org
>>>>>> <mailto:beh...@behdad.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 06/03/2012 12:19 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
>>>>>>>> This have been fixed in FontForge’s master branch, it will
>>>> break
>>>>>> feature
>>>>>>>> files expecting the older behaviour, but there is not much
>>>> we can do
>>>>>>>> here, and it is hardly the only incompatible fix to
>>>> FontForge’s
>>>>>> feature
>>>>>>>> file code since the last release.
>>>>>>> Thanks Khaled. I still don't have any idea how to correctly
>>>> handle
>>>>>> these
>>>>>>> sequences in HarfBuzz, but will experiment with Uniscribe,
>>>> try to
>>>>>> see if I
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> figure out what it's doing.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 08:18:35AM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:23:16AM +0530, Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > A for the new Gaf, I'm not sure I like it. See what the others say. For
> > example,
> > کک
> > (means "flea" in Persian) looks a little strange to my eye.
> That is actually the old form, seems I missed some contextual form. It
> should have been looked like کک.
I uploaded a new tarball where this is fixed, please test (the old form
can be accessed with ss04 feature, for people who like it).
