Justification in Arabic, Korean

CCing i18n people in case they have input...

Paul Nelson (ATC) wrote:

 >
 > 1. Korean typography uses white space justification. They never function
 > as ideographic text. I have confirmed this with two different people,
 > but am waiting for bood resources.

The test case for this would be in these mixed-script cases:
   If there is a line where the Korean has inter-character expansion
     while the Latin does not, then it is definitely as ideographic
   If there is an article where Japanese or Chinese has inter-character
     expansion while Latin and Korean do not, then it is definitely not
     as ideographic
   If there is an article where Japanese or Chinese *and* Korean have
     inter-character expansion but Latin does not, then it is
     definitely not as ideographic.

If we can't find any of these three, then it is hard to say: it
might just mean that Korean prefers choosing 'inter-word' to
'inter-ideograph', not that the 'inter-ideograph' scheme would not
expand Korean.

Our best bet would be to find Korean embedded and justified in a
Chinese or Japanese paragraph, and see which of the last two cases
it matches.

 > 2. Yes. There is a need for Newspaper style justification that stretches
 > Arabic scripts evenly. This is used with Arabic and Uighur.

And this definitely
   - expands just the connections like lam-reh, not the disconnected
     sequences like reh-lam?
   - takes precedence over stretching word spaces?

 > 3. I have not had time yet to contact Chinese type people. This week or
 >    next week I may have a chance.

Ok. Feel free to ask them about my scans. :)
   http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/style/discuss/emphasis-marks/
I wish I could find that book with x-shaped marks...

~fantasai

Received on Sunday, 12 March 2006 21:55:36 UTC