From: Philipp Reichmuth (reichmuth@web.de)
Date: Wed Jan 05 2005 - 18:35:57 CST
Kenneth Whistler schrieb:
>>>I wouldn't rule this out entirely. For example, I know one attempt
>>>to implement a Tibetan font where the underlying representation was
>>>Latin (Wylie), and the Tibetan glyphs were generated from the Latin
>>>transliteration using OpenType rules
>
> I presume Philipp Reichmuth was talking about:
> http://www.nitartha.org/wylieandconverter.html
Actually I wasn't; I was referring to an in-house project at our
institute for Central Asian Studies, a derivative of the fonts from
http://home.t-online.de/home/0228359452-0001/jamyang.htm. Newer
versions use "proper" Unicode Tibetan codepoints instead, for obvious
interoperability reasons.
The underlying plain text is perfectly Unicode conformant; after all,
it's only Latin, and the standard isn't concerned about glyphs and their
meaning. I guess this is "nonconformant" only in that it somehow defeats
the purpose of Unicode.
Philipp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 05 2005 - 18:37:34 CST