For 16-bit TeX, I recommend abandoning the old ASCII name approach and use
Unicode directly. Thankfully we no longer are limited to ASCII as was Knuth
in the old days. Or are you interested in such names in order to have a
simple keyboard input method?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Werner Lemberg [SMTP:email@example.com]
> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 1998 4:30 AM
> To: Multiple Recipients of
> Subject: Re: short Unicode names?
> On Fri, 2 Jan 1998, Herbert Elbrecht wrote:
> > >> Is there an algorithm how to convert long Unicode names like 'LATIN
> > >> CAPITAL LETTER A WITH ACUTE' into short Adobe-ish names like
> > >>
> > >> With `short' I mean a name not longer than about 32 characters and no
> > >> spaces in it.
> > >>
> > >> Or are there already short Unicode names defined? U+00C1 is not very
> > >> descriptive...
> > The problem is not with 'LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A WITH ACUTE' being an
> > Adobe standard character - an AdobeGlyphList for backward compatibility
> > within existing Adobe fonts is available for all these standard
> > characters.
> > The problem is with all characters outside the Adobe character
> > And that's all additional Unicode characters! Who's to describe? For
> > What for? Will free-style naming really do for these characters - I
> > wonder!
> I'm not really interested in backward compatibility since Adobe names are
> inconsistent anyway (cf. `mu' in Macintosh standard encoding vs. `mu1' in
> WGL4 as used in Microsoft TrueType fonts). I'm rather interested whether
> someone has created Adobe-like names already from the Unicode names-- the
> primary goal is a standardized glyph name database for TeX resp. its 16bit
> successor, Omega.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:38 EDT