Re: Custom fonts (was: Tolkien wanta-be)

From: Chris Jacobs (c.t.m.jacobs@hccnet.nl)
Date: Mon Mar 17 2003 - 04:21:05 EST

  • Next message: Andrew C. West: "Re: per-character "stories" in a database"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Doug Ewell" <dewell@adelphia.net>
    To: "Unicode Mailing List" <unicode@unicode.org>
    Cc: "Chris Jacobs" <c.t.m.jacobs@hccnet.nl>; "Pim Blokland"
    <pblokland@planet.nl>
    Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 12:05 AM
    Subject: Re: Custom fonts (was: Tolkien wanta-be)

    > Chris Jacobs <c dot t dot m dot jacobs at hccnet dot nl> wrote:
    >
    > > A codepoint in itself does not specify a character.
    > > Font + codepoint does specify a character.
    > > Charset + codepoint also can specify a character.
    >
    > All true for non-Unicode fonts. But then one is left to wonder why we
    > are discussing this on the Unicode list.
    >
    > > Say font A has on E000 an apple symbol, while font B has there a
    > > banana.
    > > Say for this reason I gave font B an offset of 0100
    > >
    > > Then on my system U+E000 in plaintext should indeed display an apple
    > > symbol and U+E100 a banana symbol.
    > > But if there are more fonts with an apple symbol U+E000 does not
    > > specify the font to use.
    >
    > This isn't conformant and won't work.

    Which rule in The Unicode Standard Version 3.0 exactly is this not
    conformant with?



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Mar 17 2003 - 04:23:16 EST