Re: glyph selection for Unicode in browsers

From: Thomas Chan (
Date: Thu Sep 26 2002 - 09:25:27 EDT

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Comma below, cedilla, and Gagauz"

    On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 wrote:

    > Tex Texin wrote,
    > > Given the (un)workable approach, do you then intend to have variants of
    > > code2000 for CJKT, so one can make the appropriate assignments? (ugh!)
    > Code2000's coverage of CJKTV ideographs isn't adequate to support any language
    > yet. Eventually and hopefully the repertoire will be completed. Given the
    > current "ceiling" of 65536 max glyphs per font, it might not be feasible to
    > try to have one font cover all scripts and variants, but time will tell.

    I don't mean to detract from the point of this discussion, nor to
    criticize a particular font, but I think the Han glyphs in Code2000 are
    aesthetically disappointing in that that they are distorted enough (shape,
    proportions, and positioning) that they differ farther from any typical
    CJK font more so than two comparable CJK fonts may differ due to
    language/country glyph preferences. Compare, for instance, with other
    sans serif CJK fonts like Arial Unicode MS, (cn) MS Hei, or (ja) MS

    But changing the example to fonts like Arial Unicode MS doesn't completely
    solve everything--a sans serif font is not the norm for non-trivial
    quantities of CJK text (compare any book or newspaper). These problems
    would cause rejection of a font faster than adverse reactions to
    foreign/unfamiliar glyph designs. (The aging serifed Bitstream Cyberbit
    font might be a better example in this respect.)

    Thomas Chan

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Sep 26 2002 - 10:06:31 EDT