--- Nicholas Bodley <nbodley@...> wrote:

>
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 01:26:15 -0400, suzmccarth
> <suzmccarth@...>
> quoted:
>
> > Trivedi writes, "The new technological
> > developments in typesetting have finally removed
> > all constraints which inhibited the development
> > of Devanagari script."
>
> I think it's worth noting than computers have, more
> than likely, been a real boon to typesetting Arabic
> script. Scientific American, roughly a decade ago,
> had a very fine article about modern typesetting of
> Arabic.

It seems true for the Naskh style usually used for
Arabic but for the Nastaleeq style where the letters
run along a sloping line and require a lot more
ligatures, things are only just getting going in
computer typesetting. Urdu also has to deal with a
couple of Unicode odditties due to varying shapes of
some letters. Nastaleeq is commonly used for
Urdu. I forget off the top of my head which is
preferred for Persian.

Andrew Dunbar.

> --
> Nicholas Bodley /*|*\ Waltham, Mass. (Not "MA")
> The curious hermit -- autodidact and polymath
> If you're determined to be afraid, choose wisely
> what to be afraid of.
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> Has someone you know been affected by illness or
> disease?
> Network for Good is THE place to support health
> awareness efforts!
>

http://us.click.yahoo.com/RzSHvD/UOnJAA/79vVAA/GP4qlB/TM

>

--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

>
>
> www.egroups.com/group/qalam - world's writing
> systems.
> To unsubscribe: qalam-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> qalam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
>

http://en.wiktionary.org -- http://linguaphile.sf.net/cgi-bin/translator.pl

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com