On Thu, 14 Oct 1999, Rick McGowan wrote:
> Markus, et al,
> I'm forwarding this on behalf of Michel Suignard. It went to another list,
> but didn't get copied here to the Unicode list.
> >From firstname.lastname@example.org Thu Oct 14 10:30:16 1999
> > Subject: RE: AFII font for UCS:2000
> > Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 10:25:51 -0700
> AFII responsabilities have been taken over by the Unicode Consortium. The
> same process is used to produce the ISO 10646 character charts and the
> Unicode book character charts. [snip]
> There is really no need to revive AFII, the Unicode Consortium has already
> taken over AFII responsabilities.
> Michel Suignard
> AFII former Treasurer,
Friday, October 15, 1999
Given that for some scripts (mainly Arabic, Indic and SE Asian) the
character to glyph ratio (or roughly the Unicode(tm) characters to AFII
registered glyphs ratio) is often 1:several, has the Unicode Consortium
plans for AFII glyphs that rendering engines need but that have no single
equivalent in Unicode? Could one hope to see a list (or lists by script?)
of the sequences of Unicode codes that could invoke these "orphan glyphs"?
I know such lists would involve significant effort but by reducing
vendor's redundant efforts and costs they would be of considerable utility
in promoting availabilty of legible text in these scripts. While there
will always be specific device dependencies, is more standardization
A more general question could be: Now that the Unicode Consortium has
"taken over AFII responsibilities", beyond using AFII data to create
version 3.0, what does it plan to do with these responsibilities? (If it
needs stating I affirm I'm all for creating 3.0.)
I'll be away next week.
Jim Agenbroad ( jage@LOC.gov )
The above are purely personal opinions, not necessarily the official
views of any government or any agency of any.
Phone: 202 707-9612; Fax: 202 707-0955; US mail: I.T.S. Dev.Gp.4, Library
of Congress, 101 Independence Ave. SE, Washington, D.C. 20540-9334 U.S.A.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:53 EDT