RE: TrueType signature bits and MS Word

From: Chris Pratley (chrispr@microsoft.com)
Date: Wed Jul 17 2002 - 23:21:39 EDT


You should always set as much info correctly in the font as you can.
What you are seeing are the results of some workarounds we had to
implement to handle poorly made fonts.

Chris
MS Word

Sent with Office11 on WindowsXP

-----Original Message-----
From: Raymond Mercier [mailto:RaymondM@compuserve.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 1:46 AM
To: Unicode List

I have been looking at what Word does about the Unicode ranges.
In fact it does more than read the OS2 table. Even if the bits have not
been set, nor even the codepage, Word will fill in the appropriate
values.
Within the Word document, there is a list of font names, each with the
details of the signature (codepage & unicode ranges). Even if these bits

have not been set in the font, (as you can see from Fontlab or from the

Font properties extension) values will be supplied by Word. The values
supplied by Word in this list are shown in my Fontlist
(http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/RaymondM) which just reads the

details from the list.

SO (which I hadn't really noticed before), it seems that in Word there
is
some scanning of the unicode values in the font, then a sorting into
ranges, and assigning to bits.
The natural question then is, if the font is used in Word, does it
really
make any difference whether the bits have set in its OS2 table, or not ?

Raymond Mercier



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jul 17 2002 - 21:31:14 EDT