Re: Should there be a "UniGlyph" standard?

From: John Hudson (tiro@tiro.com)
Date: Wed Mar 06 2002 - 12:31:42 EST


At 06:12 3/6/2002, Roozbeh Pournader wrote:

> > This was tried at one point, and was called the AFII glyph registry.
> > However, glyph enumeration is tricky and the project died a slow and
> > agonizing death from lack of interest. AFII eventually went out of
> business
> > at the turn of the millenium.
>
>And left us with those weird standard Adobe Glyph Names for letters of
>Arabic, Cyrillic, Hebrew, etc. You know what a pain it is to work with
>glyph names like "afii57425" ...

Too much of a pain. Last year I migrated all my Arabic and Hebrew glyph
names to uniXXXX format; since Arabic characters not listed in the Adobe
Glyph List need uniXXXX names anyway, it simply made more sense to use this
format consistently for all glyphs.

I will probably do the same for Cyrillic in future fonts.

John Hudson

Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
Vancouver, BC tiro@tiro.com

... es ist ein unwiederbringliches Bild der Vergangenheit,
das mit jeder Gegenwart zu verschwinden droht, die sich
nicht in ihm gemeint erkannte.

... every image of the past that is not recognized by the
present as one of its own concerns threatens to disappear
irretrievably.
                                               Walter Benjamin



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Mar 06 2002 - 12:29:20 EST