yet another mistake in KFE1924

The maker of the 1924 Cairo edition evidently did not understand the function of the mutating small alif: it is not a vowel sign but turns yāʾ or wāw into alif — in other words, a letter that looks like a yāʾ is an alif (alif bi‑šakl al‑yāʾ). In early Warš prints the mutating alif is correctly placed above the yāʾ; the Cairo edition, by contrast, places the sign some­times, correct­ly some­times not.
top: Warš prints; second: KFE; third UT0; fourth: Muṣḥaf al-Muʿallim, Tunis; 5^thTaj
It should sit above yāʾ, not after it. In Morocco this is always the case, in KFE it is some­times like it should be, some­times not.
Mikāl is dif­ferent from the others, be­cause Qālun (Tunis): /mi­kāʾil/. While here there is a hover­ing sign and a tooth/نبرة/letter, in the other cases there is just one letter. What KFE and UT are doing is just wrong: they often have use­less tooth/نبرة !
This is the same scribal incon­sis­ten­cy, likely due to care­less­ness, that Otto Pretzl had already notised.
For good measure I have added a last row in IPak. Here the dagger is neither a small alif, nor a mutating sign, but a ā-vowel sign; it belongs to the con­sonant; the tooth/nabra is mute.
So, it is not only Abū ʿUmar ʿUbaidah Muḥammad Saliḥ al-Banki who does not care, KFE and UT are not perfect either.
–­