Re: Why people still want to encode precomposed letters

Date: Tue Nov 18 2008 - 19:58:14 CST

  • Next message: John H. Jenkins: "Re: Why people still want to encode precomposed letters"

    Quoting "Kenneth Whistler" <>:

    > Michael Everson said:
    >> >> There is no guidance or help for font developers. So they just
    >> make what's
    >> >> in the code charts.
    > John Knightley replied:
    >> > Which of course begs the question where such guidance should be kept .
    > And Andrew West responded:
    >> <>
    > To which my comment is assuredly not. Unicode named sequences
    > are not nor have they ever been intended to serve as
    > guidance for font developers about what glyphs should or should
    > not be supported for fonts.

    Yes I agree that this is not what this is intended for. However there
    would be considerable advantages in having a list of "standard"
    sequences as a benchmark and as guidance. Saying the components are in
    unicode is a long way for saying it is possible to type or display a

    In many respects the request for a precomposed letter is a request for
    recognition that a sequence is used. Whilst maybe not ISO 10646, being
    in some standard would be logical.

    John K

    > --Ken

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 18 2008 - 20:01:48 CST