b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
- To: Karl Randolph <kwrandolph AT email.com>
- Cc: Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 11:31:28 +0100
On 18/05/2005 02:55, Karl Randolph wrote:
Peter:Karl, perhaps you could tell me off-list which sites or web pages have a problem, and which ones are OK. (For Snunit, please give me the exact URL of a page with cantillated text, as I don't read modern Hebrew.) I can then investigate whether the problem is something to do with how the text is encoded, or to do with the font. If necessary I will take this up with the font designer.
Because I wanted to read and write Hebrew on this computer, I have
specifically Hebrew fonts included on this computer. That is beyond just a
unicode basic font. I noticed that when I accessed Hebrew sites that include
all the points, such as Snunit in Israel, that at least in Safari all the
points, including cantillations, are rendered, and that correctly. (If these
fonts are missing any points, that I wouldn’t know, as I usually read without
any points at all.)
But I notice that sites that demand SBL fonts never render correctly. When I
use a font other than SBL, the best I have gotten so far is some dots are
incorrectly placed but the file is still readible. That is even when using
fonts that rendered correctly on the other sites. If the SBL font is not the
problem, then why do files asking for the SBL font not render correctly when
using other fonts? Would the SIL Ezra font work even though the other fonts
don’t? Why are dots such as dagesh and suruk misplaced, not just cantillation
points, whereas on other sites not asking for SBL fonts have all dots
properly placed? It is problems like this that make me question how well SBL
fonts follow unicode standards.
I assume that you have checked that the sites which appear OK to you are fully pointed and cantillated. There is of course no problem with unpointed Hebrew on any system, and there will be very few problems if a site has (for some strange reason) cantillations but no points. And I know of very few sites which offer fully pointed and cantillated Hebrew. One of them is http://www.mechon-mamre.org/c/ct/c0101.htm. Does that look OK to you?
Is there any one particular point or combination which causes special problems?
--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 17/05/2005
-
Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2
, (continued)
- Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2, Peter Kirk, 05/17/2005
- Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2, Peter Kirk, 05/17/2005
-
Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2,
Karl Randolph, 05/17/2005
- Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2, Peter Kirk, 05/17/2005
-
Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2,
Trevor Peterson, 05/17/2005
- Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2, Peter Kirk, 05/17/2005
-
Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2,
Karl Randolph, 05/17/2005
-
Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2,
Peter Kirk, 05/17/2005
- Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2, Trevor Peterson, 05/17/2005
-
Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2,
Peter Kirk, 05/17/2005
-
Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2,
Karl Randolph, 05/17/2005
- Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2, Peter Kirk, 05/18/2005
- Re: Unicode cont. was Re: [b-hebrew] 1 Samuel 7:2, Karl Randolph, 05/18/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.