Re: Editing Arabic TEI

At our project, Corpus Coranicum and some satellite projects (early arabic poetry, Paleocoran) we use oxygen XML for editing the comments. As well, we have developed a font for displaying the arabic text better than standard fonts do (arabic script is normally to small, when used in a mixed writing environment), called Coranica (http://corpuscoranicum.de/about/tools). [We are at the moment working for an english translation, at the moment only german, sorry]. As well, we want to prepare our common editing environment, ediarum (which is a ‚plugin‘ for oxygen, giving the editors a set of tags normally needed in digital editing) for the use of arabic and other rtl writing systems (see https://github.com/telota/ediarum).

 Best, Markus

> Am 03.02.2017 um 09:46 schrieb Frederik Elwert <[email protected]>:
> 
> Dear David,
> 
> I helped a colleague set up Oxygen for editing an Arabic manuscript. It
> works quite okay. Indeed, the Author view is more suited for substantial
> work on the text, but I guess this is an inherent problem of XML for RTL
> languages: The tags themselves run LTR, the text in between in the other
> direction, so the cursor swaps direction all the time, making the
> behaviour slightly unpredictable all the time.
> 
> Best,
> Frederik
> 
> 
> 
> Am 02.02.2017 um 22:34 schrieb Birnbaum, David J:
>> Dear TEI-L,
>> 
>> I don't work with Arabic texts myself, but some of my students and
>> colleagues do, and one has just asked me to recommend an XML editor. I use
>> Oxygen for all of my own work, and I've watched the video that SyncroSoft
>> produced about editing Arabic in the Oxygen Author view, but before I
>> point my colleague in that and only that direction, I wanted to ask what
>> others have used to edit Arabic TEI documents. When I've poked at Arabic
>> in Oxygen before (older versions, though, so the following may no longer
>> be the case), the Text view sometimes stranded angle brackets in the wrong
>> place. The Author view obviously (no angle brackets) didn't do that, but
>> it broke onto new lines in places that made sense from an engineering
>> perspective, but that made the continuous text harder to read. All in all,
>> it was usable, but should my colleague also be considering alternatives?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> David
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Frederik Elwert
> 
> Digital Humanities Coordinator
> Center for Religious Studies
> Ruhr-University Bochum
> 
> Universitätsstr. 90a
> D-44780 Bochum
> 
> Phone +49(0)234 32-23024
>