Re: But E0000 Custom Language Tags Are Actually *Required* For Use By Unicode

From: UList@dfa-mail.com
Date: Fri Mar 04 2005 - 20:06:14 CST

  • Next message: vlad: "Re: Hentaigana"

    Peter Kirk wrote:
    > But in effect, in the current situation these two
    > situations can be dealt with only by the same mechanism: choose a
    > suitable font.

    Which leaves me wondering what all the Unicode work has been for -- since
    that's hardly different from 8-bit fonts. With all this "higher level
    formatting" why not just have "encoding" as one of those higher-level tags?

    If you currently need a "Serbian Lucida (Grande)" font, and a "Bulgarian
    Lucida (Grande)" font, and 20 other modern local variants of "Lucida (Grande)"
    -- just add a "Latin Lucida (Grande)" and a "Greek Lucida (Grande)", and a
    "CJK 1 Lucida (Grande)" and a "CJK 2 Lucida (Grande)", etc.

    But I thought the whole Unicode ideal was to replace all those different fonts
    with one single "Unicode Lucida (Grande)" font -- and not a font that contains
    every abstract characterhood -- but a font that can actually display every
    basic letterform needed for every writing system.

    And that's more than an "ideal" if you have a handheld device with just one
    hardwired Unicode font built in.

    IMHO
    Doug

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 04 2005 - 19:52:58 CST