Re: Should there be a "UniGlyph" standard?

From: John Hudson (tiro@tiro.com)
Date: Thu Mar 07 2002 - 05:37:34 EST


At 02:08 3/7/2002, Roozbeh Pournader wrote:

> > 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.
>
>But won't non-standard glyph names get the user into trouble with some
>existing pieces of software?

The uniXXXX format names are standard. The Adobe software that makes use of
glyph names can handle Adobe Glyph List names or names based on Unicode
values using Adobe's glyph naming rules. Seethe Adobe docume 'Unicode and
Glyph Names' at:

  http://partners.adobe.com/asn/developer/type/unicodegn.html *

I am not aware of any software that relies on the old AFII names without
also supporting the uniXXXX names.

John Hudson

* This document needs to be updated, because a new mechanism for naming
supplementary plane characters has been developed at Adobe. All other
aspects of the document are current.

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 : Thu Mar 07 2002 - 05:53:41 EST