From: Werner LEMBERG (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Feb 23 2003 - 08:27:30 EST
> phi 03D5
> phi1 03C6
> The problem with this is that the preferred 'text' form for the
> lower Greek alphabet is the glyph shown in Unicode 3.0 Book @
> U+03C6, which is the glyph found in most fonts having the Greek
> alphabet, including TNR.
Thus my suggestion to introduce an additional code point `GREEK
ALTERNATIVE SYMBOL PHI'...
> That glyph should not be rightly identified with a glyphname of an
> alternate glyph (phi1). The fact that Adobe's Symbol font glyph
> naming was inherently inconsistent with Unicode was known since
> before Unicode 2.0, but it was deemed irrelevant, since Symbol
> encoding was not any official standard. Our fonts contain both
> glyphs (and additional alternates as well) and are consistent with
> Unicode 3.0.
Sigh. Is it only me who sees a problem here? <sarcasm> I get the
impression that most persons answering in this thread think ``Horray,
my font is compliant to Unicode 3.0, and everything else is not
What about the many PS printers which have Adobe's symbol font built
in? I'm really interested in any constructive idea how to solve the
problem in a realistic way. Buying new fonts just for this purpose is
not realistic IMHO.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 14:02:21 EST