Date: Wed Jun 08 2011 - 22:21:01 CDT
From: Karl Pentzlin (email@example.com)
> If you want to use special Unicode characters e.g. for linguistic work
> (beyond common things like IPA), it is a fact that you need
> special fonts which contain these characters.
> Usually, you cannot expect to have them included in standard fonts
> like Arial or Times New Roman.
> However, a character, once selected, has to be displayed as the
> "correct" character in all situations as long as the used font contains it
> at all.
> Otherwise, the character has a "multiple identity", which indicates an
> erroneous unification of different abstract characters into a single
> Unicode point.
> Font selection is a selection for a stylistic or aesthetic preference,
> not a means to select a specific character.
> (This is a generally applicable answer to an issue raised during
> discussions at the ongoing SC2/WG2 meeting in Helsinki.)
> - Karl Pentzlin
Can anyone remind me why Variation sequences aren't the appropriate response to the IPA problem? It seems to me that 'a' + VS1 should be defined as the two-story IPA a, and 'g' + VS1 should be defined as the single story IPA g. It would restrict the set of glyphs that should be used to represent the character, but not create a duplicate encoding - exactly what the variation selectors were encoded for, right?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 08 2011 - 22:25:08 CDT