Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Kirk Lowery <klowery AT whi.wts.edu>]

Peter Kirk wrote:

> Does the source of Jim's e-mail as you received it contain HTML as 
> well as plain text? If not, the problem may be that the server of 
> this list is stripping out the HTML portion. That is I think a 
> reasonable thing for a list server to do, but it certainly rules out
>  Jim's proposed way of sending non-Unicode Hebrew, at least for this
>  list.

Just to confirm Peter's guess: the moderators (following common practice
across the Internet) have deliberately set the list server to strip out
attachments and html in email. The reason is that one of the most common
ways "malware" propagate themselves is via attachments and javascript
(programs embedded in html). This policy is not going to change.

Often people post not just to the list, but cc other individuals as
well. Those copies, of course, will have what the email program of the
sender has set.

A comment on the general subject of Unicode and the list: for several
years we have not encouraged the use of Unicode to replace the
transliteration system we have used for the last decade because:

1. the adoption of Unicode was not even close to universal by software
developers, including a freely available Unicode Hebrew font

2. most academic/corporate users' networks were not set up to use Unicode

3. most academic and corporate users do not have control over the
configuration of their machines

4. most users don't know how to configure their machines and software to
use Unicode; i.e., to the end user, the use of Unicode was not transparent

For several years now, point (1) above has been changing rapidly. Point
(2) is also changing, albeit more slowly. I consider point (3) little
changed, and (4) not at all changed.

It is clear that computing will be universally Unicode by the end of the
decade. So b-hebrew should at some point transition to that. How? When?
Who and how many get left behind? If b-hebrew is to be accessible to
all, then we obviously have to go with a "lowest common denominator".
But that is also a moving target.

Here is what I suggest:

1. If you choose to cite the text via Unicode, include the
transliterated version, or accept that some, if not most, will not be 
able to follow your discussion -- kinda defeats the purpose for the
list, eh?

2. To those who use Unicode Hebrew successfully: volunteer -- on- and
off-list -- to help others as they struggle to change and adapt

3. Volunteer to write -- and maintain! -- FAQs and HOWTOs for all the
major operating system platforms (Windows,Mac,Linux) and all the major
email/word processing software (Outlook, Eudora, Thunderbird, Word,
OpenOffice, et alia) and how to configure and use them with Unicode
Hebrew, AND how to deal with the consequences of using Unicode when
perhaps others around them do not or the impact on the rest of their
platform/software.

If you are knowledgeable and experienced with using Unicode Hebrew (and
you know who you are! :-) , and are willing to tackle a piece of the 
above tasks, contact me directly <klowery AT whi.wts.edu> and we'll talk
about ways and means.

In the meantime, using transliteration remains the recommended means of
citing the Hebrew Bible for b-hebrew. But we also recommend that
everyone start learning how to use Unicode Hebrew on their systems...

Blessings,

Kirk
B-Hebrew co-chair
--
Kirk E. Lowery, Ph.D.
Director, Westminster Hebrew Institute
Adjunct Professor of Old Testament
Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia
--
The oboe's a horn made of wood.
I'd play you a tune if I could,
But the reeds are a pain,
And the fingering's insane.
It's the ill wind that no one blows good.
--Ogden Nash