Date: Sun Mar 11 2007 - 18:30:15 CST
these are considered to be equivalent in unicode, which means you need
the unicode codepoint plus some other marker.
One way is described in
and todate ione submission has been recieved
Quoting Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <email@example.com>:
> Hi John,
> -On [20070311 18:08], firstname.lastname@example.org (email@example.com) wrote:
>> in unicode terms whether the square is on the left or the right is a
>> matter for the fontmaker to decide for the character U+9AA8, or for
>> any of the 304 other characters in unicode that have U+9AA8 as part of
>> the character.
> I take it you mean that the type design is totally up to the designer I
> understand that.
> It does make sense if in this case they both refer to the same character,
> because if they do not then there's a need to disambiguate into separate code
> points for all I know. And that's what I am in essence trying to find out.
> That I am in fact working with the right characters and yes then you
> automatically come to how a certain glyph is given form, especially if you
> also have to provide a means to look them up by radical(s). And then any
> unexplained inconsistency by the Unicode reference glyphs causes eyebrows to
> get raised.
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
> ????? ?????? ??? ?? ??????
> http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/
> The soul's dark cottage, batter'd and decay'd, lets in new light
> through chinks that Time has made...
This message sent through Virus Free Email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 11 2007 - 18:32:46 CST