Closed bobh0303 closed 4 years ago
After thinking about this, the name I suggested above is incorrect. For all the hah-like glyphs that explicitly name added dots, tah, etc., the glyph names explicitly indicate whether the added components are above or below, so U+076F should not omit such an indication.
In the case of U+076F, the tah and two dots are clearly below as shown, for example, in the Calibri font:
Thus the glyph name should be changed to hahTahTwodotshorizontalbelow-ar
current glyphData.xml says:
The
above
in the name makes one expect that the tah and two dots are above the hah, when in fact they are below as shown in the Unicode charts:I suggest changing the name to
hahTahTwodotshorizontal-ar
.