Re: Language Tagging And Unicode

From: Robert A. Rosenberg (
Date: Tue Jan 18 2000 - 12:50:02 EST

At 04:22 AM 01/18/2000 -0800, Janko Stamenovic wrote:
>- Why is it so bad idea to have five new characters for Serbian Cyrillic in
>Unicode anyway? Which negative effects actually this would really make? As
>we saw, different glyphs must exist. So the fonts/tables would not get any
>smaller nevertheless -- in fact even now when one glyph is the same for more
>characters, it appears in the font definition only once. For this particular
>problem I don't see that the acceptance of this would make any domino

I agree. You assign separate codepoints to the 5 characters. In Roman Fonts
they map to the same Glyphs as the Russian Characters (since they are the
same Characters/Glyphs as the Russian). For Italic Fonts, these 5
Codepoints map to Serbian Glyphs (if they exist) or to the Russian Glyphs
(if not supplied in the font). The Serbian Keyboard emits the Serbian Codes
for the 5 characters and all is handled automatically (to mix in Russian,
switch to a Russian Keyboard just as you would switch to an English or
Japanese one to Embed English or Japanese).

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT