N2723
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2
PROPOSAL SUMMARY FORM TO ACCOMPANY SUBMISSIONSFOR ADDITIONS TO THE REPERTOIRE OF ISO/IEC 106461
Please fill all the sections A, B and C below.
(Please read Principles and Procedures Document for guidelines and details before filling this form.)
See http://www.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/summaryform.html for latest Form.
See http://www.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/principles.html for latest Principles and Procedures document.
See http://www.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/roadmaps.html for latest roadmaps.

A. Administrative
1. Title:
Proposal to encode additional Arabic-script characters_______________________________________________________________________________
2. Requester's name: ___________________________________________________________________________
INCITS/L2; Unicode Technical Committee; Jonathan Kew, SIL International
3. Requester type (Member body/Liaison/Individual contribution):
Member; Liaison; expert contribution____________________________________
4. Submission date:______________
2004-03-15
5. Requester's reference (if applicable): _____________________________________________________________
6. (Choose one of the following:)
This is a complete proposal:______________
Yesor,More information will be provided later:______________
B. Technical - General
1. (Choose one of the following:)
a. This proposal is for a new script (set of characters):______________
No
Proposed name of script: __________________________________________________________
b. The proposal is for addition of character(s) to an existing block:______________Yes
Name of the existing block:Arabic & Arabic Supplement___________________________________________
2. Number of characters in proposal:______________
5
3. Proposed category (see section II, Character Categories):______________
A
4. Proposed Level of Implementation (1, 2 or 3) (see clause 14, ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000):______________
2
Is a rationale provided for the choice?
______________Yes
If Yes, reference: ________________________________________________________________
Includes base combining marks
5. Is a repertoire including character names provided?
______________
Yesa. If YES, are the names in accordance with the 'character naming guidelines
in Annex L of ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000?
______________Yes
b. Are the character shapes attached in a legible form suitable for review?
______________
Yes
6. Who will provide the appropriate computerized font (ordered preference: True Type, or PostScript format) for
publishing the standard? ________________________________________________________________
Jonathan Kew, SIL International
If available now, identify source(s) for the font (include address, e-mail, ftp-site, etc.) and indicate the tools
used:jonathan _kew@sil.org______________________________________________________________________________________
TrueType font generated with FontLab 4.6____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7. References:a. Are references (to other character sets, dictionaries, descriptive texts etc.) provided? Yes______________
b. Are published examples of use (such as samples from newspapers, magazines, or other sources)of proposed characters attached?
______________
Yes
8. Special encoding issues:
Does the proposal address other aspects of character data processing (if applicable) such as input,
presentation, sorting, searching, indexing, transliteration etc. (if yes please enclose information)?
Yes: suggested Unicode character properties are included______________________________________________________________________________________
9. Additional Information:
Submitters are invited to provide any additional information about Properties of the proposed Character(s) or Scriptthat will assist in correct understanding of and correct linguistic processing of the proposed character(s) or script.
Examples of such properties are: Casing information, Numeric information, Currency information, Display behaviour
information such as line breaks, widths etc., Combining behaviour, Spacing behaviour, Directional behaviour, Default
Collation behaviour, relevance in Mark Up contexts, Compatibility equivalence and other Unicode normalization
related information. See the Unicode standard at http://www.unicode.org for such information on other scripts. Also
see http://www.unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/UnicodeCharacterDatabase.html and associated Unicode Technical
Reports for information needed for consideration by the Unicode Technical Committee for inclusion in the UnicodeStandard.

N2352-F
2001-09-04
ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 1 of 3
Page 1

2004-03-30

N2723
C. Technical - Justification
1. Has this proposal for addition of character(s) been submitted before?
Not to WG2______________
If YES explain __________________________________________________________________________(but characters approved for encoding at UTC #98, February 2004)
2. Has contact been made to members of the user community (for example: National Body,
user groups of the script or characters, other experts, etc.)?
______________Yes
If YES, with whom? ______________________________________________________________
Linguists and NGOs working in S. Asia, N. Africa
If YES, available relevant documents: ________________________________________________
See §4 below
3. Information on the user community for the proposed characters (for example:
size, demographics, information technology use, or publishing use) is included?
______________
Yes
Reference: ____________________________________________________________________________
See §3 below
4. The context of use for the proposed characters (type of use; common or rare)______________
Rare
Reference: ____________________________________________________________________________
See §3 below; rare only because of limited literacy in user communities
5. Are the proposed characters in current use by the user community?
______________Yes
If YES, where? Reference: _______________________________________________________________
Northern Areas of Pakistan; Mali
6. After giving due considerations to the principles in Principles and Procedures document (a WG 2 standing
document) must the proposed characters be entirely in the BMP?
______________Yes
If YES, is a rationale provided?
______________Yes
If YES, reference: _________________________________________________________
Extensions to BMP Arabic repertoire, see §3 below
7. Should the proposed characters be kept together in a contiguous range (rather than being scattered)?
_______
No
8. Can any of the proposed characters be considered a presentation form of an existing
character or character sequence?
______________No
If YES, is a rationale for its inclusion provided?
______________
If YES, reference: ________________________________________________________
9. Can any of the proposed characters be encoded using a composed character sequence of either
existing characters or other proposed characters?
______________
Possibly
If YES, is a rationale for its inclusion provided?
______________Yes
If YES, reference: ________________________________________________________
See §3.2.1 below
10. Can any of the proposed character(s) be considered to be similar (in appearance
or function) to an existing character?
______________No
If YES, is a rationale for its inclusion provided?
______________
If YES, reference: ________________________________________________________
11. Does the proposal include use of combining characters and/or use of composite sequences(see clauses 4.12 and 4.14 in ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000)?
______________Yes
If YES, is a rationale for such use provided?
______________Yes
If YES, reference: ________________________________________________________
Arabic-script vowel marks are inherently combining characters
Is a list of composite sequences and their corresponding glyph images (graphic symbols)
provided?
______________No
If YES, reference: ________________________________________________________
12. Does the proposal contain characters with any special properties such as
control function or similar semantics?
______________No
If YES, describe in detail (include attachment if necessary)______________
13. Does the proposal contain any Ideographic compatibility character(s)?
______No
If YES, is the equivalent corresponding unified ideographic character(s) identified? ____________
If YES, reference: ________________________________________________________

1

Form number: N2352-F (Original 1994-10-14; Revised 1995-01, 1995-04, 1996-04, 1996-08, 1999-03, 2001-05, 2001-09)

N2352-F
2001-09-04
ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 2 of 3
Page 2

2004-03-30

N2723
1.

Proposed character additions (shaded cells)
060

061

062

063

064

065

066

067

075

076

‫ذ‬

‫ـ‬



٠



0

‫ݠ ݐ‬

0

 

1

 

‫ء‬

‫ ف ر‬

١

‫ٳ‬

1

‫ݡ ݑ‬

2

 

‫آ‬

‫ز‬

‫ ق‬

٢

‫ٲ‬

2

‫ݢ ݒ‬

3

 

‫أ‬

‫ ڪ س‬

٣

‫ٱ‬

3

‫ݣ ݓ‬

4



‫ؤ‬

‫ل ش‬



٤

‫ٴ‬

4

‫ݤ ݔ‬

5



‫إ‬

‫م ص‬



٥

‫ٵ‬

5

‫ݕ‬

‫ݥ‬

6

‫ن ض ئ‬



٦

‫ٶ‬

6

‫ݖ‬

‫ݦ‬

7

‫ا‬

‫ط‬

‫ه‬



٧

‫ٷ‬

7

‫ݗ‬

‫ݧ‬

8

‫ظ ب‬

‫و‬



٨

‫ٸ‬

8

‫ݘ‬

‫ݨ‬

9

‫ة‬

‫ ى ع‬

٩ ‫ٹ‬

9

‫ݙ‬

‫ݩ‬

A

‫ ي غ ت‬

٪ ‫ٺ‬

A

‫ݚ‬

‫ݪ‬

‫ث‬

 

٫

‫ٻ‬

B

‫ݛ‬

‫ݫ‬
‫ݬ‬

B

؋

C

،

‫ج‬

 

٬

‫ټ‬

C

‫ݜ‬

D

‫؍‬

‫ح‬

 

‫ٽ ٭‬

D

‫ݭ ݝ‬

E

؎

‫؞‬

‫خ‬

  ‫پ ٮ‬

E

‫ݞ‬

F

؏

‫؟‬

‫د‬



F

‫ݟ‬

ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

‫؛‬

‫ٿ ٯ‬
Page 3077

2004-03-30

N2723
2.

Names list for character additions

Listing of file ArabicUTC98-names.txt;; Additions to Arabic block
;
@@
0600
Arabic
06FF;
065D
ARABIC REVERSED DAMMA* Ormuri, African languages
065E
ARABIC FATHA WITH TWO DOTS
* Kalami;; Additions to Arabic Supplement block
;
@@
0750
Arabic Supplement
077F
;
076B
ARABIC LETTER REH WITH TWO DOTS VERTICALLY ABOVE* Torwali, Ormuri
076C
ARABIC LETTER REH WITH HAMZA ABOVE* Ormuri
076D
ARABIC LETTER SEEN WITH TWO DOTS VERTICALLY ABOVE* Kalami, Ormuri

ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 4

2004-03-30

N27233.

Discussion of the proposed additions

In many minority languages of Pakistan, there is no long literary tradition, but in recent years there havebeen moves to develop suitable orthographies and an indigenous literature. Orthographies are normally based on
those of neighboring major languages, such as Urdu and Pashto, but additional letters may be needed for sounds
not found in those languages.
The present proposal is for three new Arabic-script characters that have been used in writing several suchlanguages. Examples are shown from published materials in Kalami, Ormuri, and Torwali, although these are notnecessarily the only language communities where the characters may be used. In some languages of this region,
orthographies are not yet standardized, and it is likely that as conventions are established in one language
community, they may well be adopted among neighboring communities as well.

3.1

Background on the language communities

Basic information about the languages discussed here is taken from SIL’s Ethnologue (seehttp://www.ethnologue.com/). Further comments are based on communication with linguists who have studied
in the region and have contact with local language communities and writers.

3.1.1 Kalami (Gawri)
Population
RegionAlternate names
Dialects
Classification
Comments

40,000 (1987).
Upper Swat Kohistan from between Peshmal and Kalam north to upper valleys above Kalam, also in Dir
Kohistan, in Thal, Lamuti (Kinolam), Biar (Jiar), and Rajkot (Patrak) villages. People at Khata Khotan, China,
are reported to be related, recognized by their clothing and language.
GARWI, GAWRI, GOWRI, GARWA, GAAWRO, KALAMI KOHISTANI, KOHISTANI, KOHISTANA, BASHKARIK,
BASHGHARIK, DIR KOHISTANI, DIRI, DIRWALIKALAM, USHU, THAL, LAMUTI (LAMTI), RAJKOTI (PATRAK), DASHWA.
Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Northwestern zone, Dardic, Kohistani.
Dialect differences do not hinder communication, except that speakers of other dialects have difficulty with
Rajkot. 90% to 93% lexical similarity among the main dialects; Rajkoti has 75% with Kalami; Dashwa has 77%
with Kalami, and 74% with Rajkoti. The most widely understood indigenous language in northern Swat and
Dir Kohistan. Men are fairly bilingual in Pashto; women are more limited. Rajkoti men have highbilingualism in Pashto. Uneducated men and women are limited in Urdu. There appear to be few active
speakers of Dashwa. Kalami and Ushu speakers indicate some negative attitudes toward each other's
speech. Dashwa is a clan name of people originally from around Rajkot; little information available. About
one-third migrate in winter to Mingora, Mardan, Peshawar, or the Punjab in search of work. Speakers of
Pashto, Gujari, Khowar, and other Kohistani languages live among them, but they are generally in the
majority. Patrilineal descent groups are: Drekhel, Nilor (Niliyor), Jaflor (Jafalor). The Drekhel are divided
into the Kalamkhel, Akarkhel, and Chinorkhel. The Mullakhel are Pashtoons from Lower Swat who now
speak Pashto as first language, but speak, understand, and identify with Kalami. Muslim.

Baart & Sagar (2002) give further background on the Kalami or Gawri language and orthography.
Although a few people have been writing Kalami in the past, little has been published in the language and until
recently there was no standardization of the writing system. This is now changing, however:In the summer of 1995, seven educated native Gawri speakers from Kalam formed a spelling committee anddiscussed a proposal for a writing system. They discussed the question as to which symbols should be used
for representing the sounds and tones of Gawri… [I]t was felt that there should be maximum conformity of
the Gawri writing system with that of Urdu. … On the other hand, the committee recognized the uniquenessof the Gawri language and chose to preserve this uniqueness by designing a writing system that canaccurately represent all the distinctive sounds of the language.

Since 1995, there have been a number of literary publications in the Kalami language, making use of thecharacters proposed here. Baart & Sagar include bibliographic references for several works by local authors
published by the Kalam Cultural Society.

ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 5

2004-03-30

N2723
3.1.2 Ormuri
Population
Region3,000 or more in Pakistan (1992). Population total both countries 3,050 or more.
Kaniguram, a pocket in Mahsud Pashto area northwest of Dera Ismail Khan, Wazirstan. Also spoken in
Afghanistan.
URMURI, ORMUR, ORMUI, BARGISTA, BARAKS, BARAKI
KANIGURAMI, LOGAR.
Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Ormuri-Parachi.
27% lexical similarity with Waneci, 25% to 33% with Pashto dialects. The Kanigurami retain the language.

Alternate names
Dialects
Classification
Comments
As indicated by the Ethnologue statistics, Ormuri is a small language group, and as one might expect there
has been little literary activity. However, in recent years at least one book has been published in Ormuri, and there
is work in progress to compile a dictionary. Burki (2001) mentions the alphabet developed for these purposes,
including a description of the phonemes for which new letters were devised.

3.1.3 Torwali
Population
RegionAlternate names
Dialects
Classification
Comments

60,000 (1987).
Swat Kohistan, on both sides of Swat River from just beyond Madyan north to Asrit (between Mankjal and
Peshmal), and in Chail Valley east of Madyan, Bahrain and Chail are centers.
TURVALI
BAHRAIN, CHAIL.
Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Northwestern zone, Dardic, Kohistani.
44% lexical similarity with Kalkoti and Kalami, 89% between Behrain and Chail. Men are fairly bilingual in
Pashto, more limited in Urdu. Women are limited in use of Pashto, and know almost no Urdu. Sunni Muslim.

Although Torwali is a much larger language community than Ormuri, the situation with regard to writing
is similar. As yet there has been very little published, and no effort by a spelling committee or other body tostandardize orthography. However, the examples shown in figures 13–14, from an indigenous publication, showthat similar approaches are being used to extend the script.

3.1.4 North African languages
One of the proposed vowel marks has been used in writing a number of North African languages,
including Songhoy, Fulfulde/Pulaar, Zarma, and Hausa. Background information can be found in document
L2/03-223 (N2598), based largely on Chtatou (1992).

3.2

The proposed characters

3.2.1 Base characters
Three of the proposed characters are new Arabic-script letters, and should be most appropriately encodedin the Arabic Supplement block at U+0750. All three are of General Category Lo; Combining Class 0; Bidi Type AL.
Glyph

Code

Character name

Shaping

See figures

‫ݫ‬
‫ݬ‬
‫ݭ‬

076B

ARABIC LETTER REH WITH TWO DOTS VERTICALLY
ABOVE

REH

2, 4, 5, 6, 13, 14

076C

ARABIC LETTER REH WITH HAMZA ABOVE

REH

1, 4, 5076D

ARABIC LETTER SEEN WITH TWO DOTS VERTICALLY
ABOVE

SEEN

3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12

The alphabet chart in Burki (2001), shown in figure 5 below, implies that these characters should becollated as follows:• ‫ ݫ‬U+076B somewhere between ‫ ز‬U+0632 and ‫ ژ‬U+0698;• ‫ ݬ‬U+076C between ‫ ر‬U+0631 and ‫ ز‬U+0632;• ‫ ݭ‬U+076D between ‫ س‬U+0633 and ‫ ش‬U+0634.
However, these are merely suggestions for defaults; the exact values chosen for the UCA DUCET are notcritical, as language-specific tailorings are likely to be needed for all of these languages in any case.
ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 6

2004-03-30

N2723The proposed character ‫ ݬ‬U+076C deserves special mention, in that a similar graphic appearance could be
produced by the sequence <‫ ر‬U+0631,  U+0654>, applying the HAMZA ABOVE mark to the standard Arabic letter
REH. However, this is not an appropriate encoding, as this Ormuri letter does not have any association with the
HAMZA; it has merely borrowed its graphic form as a means to create a new consonant.
In this context, we should note the existence of ‫ ځ‬U+0681 HAH WITH HAMZA ABOVE. This character is wellestablished in Pashto orthography, and probably provided the inspiration for the Ormuri extension of REH with a
HAMZA-shaped mark. There is thus a precedent for the use of this mark as a consonant modification, independentof its conventional Arabic meaning.
We may also note that ‫ ځ‬U+0681 does not decompose to a sequence <‫ ح‬U+062D,  U+0654>, as would be
expected if the mark here were in fact an occurrence of HAMZA. This is in contrast to ‫ أ‬U+0623, ‫ ؤ‬U+0624, etc., which
do decompose. This supports the view that ‫ ځ‬U+0681 is a single, indivisible letter, not a combination of an existing
letter with HAMZA added. The same would be true of the proposed ‫ ݬ‬U+076C.
Thus, although the mark seen on ‫ ځ‬U+0681 and ‫ ݬ‬U+076C is visually based on HAMZA, it is not in fact
HAMZA but an integral part of a new letter. It should not be encoded as  U+0654, especially given theinconsistency this would introduce between these two letters.

3.2.2 Vowel diacritics
The remaining two proposed characters are combining marks used to indicate vowels in extended
Arabic-based writing systems. These should both have General Category Mn; Combining Class 30; Bidi type NSM.
(The combining class value is somewhat arbitrary; ideally, all Arabic vowel marks written above the base letter
would have the same CC value, but the already-defined fixed-position classes make this impossible. Class 30,
originally assigned to ARABIC FATHA, is arbitrarily chosen for these new vowel marks.)
Glyph

Code

Character nameSee figures




065D

ARABIC REVERSED DAMMA

15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20

065E

ARABIC FATHA WITH TWO DOTS

8, 9, 10, 11, 12

In the examples below, the REVERSED DAMMA is written with an “open” glyph, something like , rather
than . Note, however, that in such hand-written sources from north African languages, it is also normal to see aform such as  for DAMMA, rather than the  of traditional Naskh-style typography. These “open” forms are
glyph variants particularly typical of hand-written text in Africa. However, it is clear that the sign being used inthese languages for the /o/ vowel is derived from DAMMA by reversing the orientation of the shape, and thus 
would be an appropriate representative glyph in a typical Naskh typeface.

3.3

Examples of use

Figure 1: Burki (1999), page 7: showing proposed ‫ ݬ‬U+076C.

ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 7

2004-03-30

N2723Figure 2: Burki (1999), page 8: showing proposed ‫ ݫ‬U+076B.

Figure 3: Burki (1999), page 10: showing proposed ‫ ݭ‬U+076D.

Figure 4: Burki (2001), page 62: showing proposed ‫ ݫ‬U+076B, ‫ ݬ‬U+076C, ‫ ݭ‬U+076D.
ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 8

2004-03-30

N2723Figure 5: Burki (2001), page 64: showing proposed ‫ ݫ‬U+076B, ‫ ݬ‬U+076C, ‫ ݭ‬U+076D.

Figure 6: Burki (2001), page 65: showing proposed ‫ ݫ‬U+076B, ‫ ݭ‬U+076D.

Figure 7: Baart & Sagar (2002), page 9: showing proposed ‫ ݭ‬U+076D.

ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 92004-03-30

N2723Figure 8: Baart & Sagar (2002), page 9: showing proposed  U+065E.

Figure 9: Baart & Sagar (2002), page 21: showing proposed  U+065E, ‫ ݭ‬U+076D.

Figure 10: Sagar (n.d.), part 2, page 2: showing proposed  U+065E, ‫ ݭ‬U+076D.

ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 10

2004-03-30

N2723Figure 11: Ulfat (2000), alphabet chart: showing proposed  U+065E, ‫ ݭ‬U+076D.

Figure 12: Ulfat (2000), page 1: showing proposed  U+065E, ‫ ݭ‬U+076D.

Figure 13: Karimi (1995), page 7: showing proposed ‫ ݫ‬U+076B.

Figure 14: Karimi (1995), part 2, page 7: showing proposed ‫ ݫ‬U+076B.
ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 11

2004-03-30

N2723Figure 15: Chtatou (1992), page 31: showing proposed  U+065D used in Songhoy.

Figure 16: Chtatou (1992), page 38: showing proposed  U+065D used in Pulaar.

Figure 17: Chtatou (1992), page 43: showing proposed  U+065D used in Zarma.

Figure 18: Chtatou (1992), page 51: showing proposed  U+065D used in Fulfulde.

ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 12

2004-03-30

N2723Figure 19: Centre Littérature Evangelique (1992), page ‘F’: showing proposed  U+065D. Compare shape used for U+064F, highlighted in blue.

Figure 20: Mission Evangelique Luthérienne (1996), page 1: showing proposed  U+065D. Compare shape used for U+064F, highlighted in blue.

ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 13

2004-03-30

N2723
4.

References

Baart, Joan L. G. and Muhammad Zaman Sagar. 2002. The Gawri language of Kalam and Dir Kohistan.
http://www.geocities.com/kcs _kalam/gawri.pdf.
Burki, Rozi Khan. 1999. ‫"؟‬#$‫*ړه زر ژ‬+‫ر‬,- ./ ‫*ن‬1‫ئ ز‬,3 ‫*خ ا‬6 [Should we leave our language on its death-bed?]. Tank,
Pakistan: Muslim Book Agency.
. 2001. Dying languages: special focus on Ormuri language. Pakistan Journal of Public Administration, vol. 6,
no. 2. Karachi: National Institute of Public Administration.
http://www.nipa-khi.edu.pk/rozi%20khan%20burki.pdf.
Centre Littérature Evangelique. 1992. Karfeeje Abajaada [Letters of the Alphabet]. Bamako, Mali: Centre Littérature
Evangelique.
Chtatou, Mohamed. 1992. Using Arabic script in writing the languages of the peoples of Muslim Africa. Rabat: Institute ofAfrican Studies.
Karimi, Abdul Hamid Khan. 1995. ‫ و ادب‬:;< =>*?@A,B ‫*ل اور‬D ‫ل‬,1 =>*?@A,B ‫[ اردو‬Urdu-Kohistani conversation andKohistani culture]. Bahrain, Swat, Pakistan: Kohistan Adab Academy.
Mission Evangelique Luthérienne. 1996. Filla No Aduna Fuddiri [Story of How the Earth Started]. Sévare, Mali: Mission
Evangelique Luthérienne au Mali.
Sagar, Muhammad Zaman (ed). 2002(?). Chunjaa! [Wake up!]: a collection of Gawri stories by different writers of Dir
Kohistan. http://www.geocities.com/kcs_ kalam/cunja.html.
Ulfat, Laal Badshah. 2000. E>F GHIHJ,K [The autumn mist]. Kalam, Swat, Pakistan: Kalam Cultural Society.
http://www.geocities.com/kcs _kalam/soal.html.

ArabicUTC98-WG2.tex

Page 14

2004-03-30