From: Patrick Andries (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Feb 17 2005 - 14:27:39 CST
Asmus Freytag a Úcrit :
> At 07:19 AM 2/17/2005, Patrick Andries wrote:
>> PRE▀BURG is the equivalent of small caps for me of Pre▀burg. I
>> believe Unicode does not regulate small caps forms...
> Unicode does not regulate small caps forms, but I disagree with your
And you are right to disagree if you understood my badly constructed
sentence as meaning that PRE▀BURG was an orthographic small caps. I
meant that it is a font transformation which is not regulated by Unicode
(just like small caps) and I don't see why Unicode should consider it
(just like it does not consider small caps forms of currently encoded
> For titles, there are often styles that transform the spelling of the
> text as well as set style attributes. For example, the document may
> contain "Pre▀burg", but a title style would transform this to ALL
> UPPERCASE and then apply a specific font.
I was tempted to suggest a "titl" feature in OpenType that would do this
(and map a to A but ▀ to ▀ if the font-designer so wishes),
unfortunately I think this "titl" feature takes capitals as input.
> Since the default casing does not work in this context, you would need
> a specific
> transform, one that does not change ▀ to SS. Given that, creating a
> specific transform that changes ▀ to FE00 followed by ▀ is not any
> more difficult.
True. But how long does it take for this variant selector to be approved
and included in Unicode ? I would guess much more time than add the
glyph to a font and having the user select a discretionary ligature in a
font for this SS (but then again Word and Latin ligature substitutions..).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 17 2005 - 14:28:56 CST