From: Chris Jacobs (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Mar 17 2003 - 04:21:05 EST
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Ewell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Unicode Mailing List" <email@example.com>
Cc: "Chris Jacobs" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "Pim Blokland"
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 12:05 AM
Subject: Re: Custom fonts (was: Tolkien wanta-be)
> Chris Jacobs <c dot t dot m dot jacobs at hccnet dot nl> wrote:
> > A codepoint in itself does not specify a character.
> > Font + codepoint does specify a character.
> > Charset + codepoint also can specify a character.
> All true for non-Unicode fonts. But then one is left to wonder why we
> are discussing this on the Unicode list.
> > Say font A has on E000 an apple symbol, while font B has there a
> > banana.
> > Say for this reason I gave font B an offset of 0100
> > Then on my system U+E000 in plaintext should indeed display an apple
> > symbol and U+E100 a banana symbol.
> > But if there are more fonts with an apple symbol U+E000 does not
> > specify the font to use.
> This isn't conformant and won't work.
Which rule in The Unicode Standard Version 3.0 exactly is this not
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Mar 17 2003 - 04:23:16 EST