🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <71405@apple.Apple.COM> opstad@Apple.COM (David Opstad) writes:

>In article <1992Aug19.120450.1@lucy.claremont.edu> dhosek@lucy.claremont.edu writes:
>>And what is this magic method? If it involves, say, some system
>>call, then you have two problems: First, the system has to be
>>Unicode-knowledgable (in short, the majority of in situ operating
>>environments can't use it) and the line breaking software has to
>>be willing to interface with this system call. In the case of a
>>system like TeX (or any of the systems which use TeX's line
>>breaking mechanism), this is likely not a viable choice. TeX
>>needs to be able to work (internally) with ligatures as physical
>>glyphs. Unicode in this case could be workable as an input
>>scheme, but not as a useful coding scheme for fonts.
>> 
>The only knowledge of Unicode the system has to have is how to map Unicodes
>to (initial cuts at) glyphs *for that font*.

One big point that needs to be made: there has to be, to avoid painful
bitches on the "support"  lines, a way for every text processing system
to access **every** glyph in **every** font, no matter what the
"philosophy" of mapping is or what kind of character codes are used,
or what kind of fonts are used.

TeX, for instance, most certainly makes this rather easy for plain CM fonts: 
you name the font and give a name to the glyph you want by its numeric 
position in the font. It's trivial. 

Doug McDonald