🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.fonts
Article #720

Re: font encoding morass

#720
From: Anders Thulin
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 08:31
52 lines
2594 bytes
In article <1992Aug21.173143.25986@adobe.com> mmwang@adobe.com (Michael Wang) writes:
>
>Well, perhaps the intent of Unicode is only to encode plain text, but if
>you look through some of the glyphs it does encode, I would argue they
>are there for typographical "richness".

How would the Unicode committe argue? Does the published standard in
any way indicate how users of the standard should interpret inclusion
of a glyph?

The draft seemed to point away from glyph encoding - more towards
concept encoding: one A-ring for letter <A-ring>, one A-ring for
concept Angstrom, one Z for letter Z, one for concept 'integers', one
letter h, one h for Planck (I think it is), one letter e, one math e,
and so on. Did the final standard change this?

I'd say the typographical rendition of these is totaly irrelevant.  If
one culture prefers to render math e in caps with some little fringe
on top, OK, as long as it expresses the concept 'base of natural
logarithms'. But this is just my interpretation of Unicode ...

>For example, look at range
>U+2100 -> U+214F. These are "letterlike" symbols including some black
>letter characters and some script characters.

Used in math writing for certain concepts, yes. Typographical niceties
are surely irrelevant, except to indicate special use.

>Or look at U+2150 -> U+218F.
>These are additional number forms including roman numerals.

These are odd - can't make them out. (Is that CD glyph still there?
It was in the draft - seemed to me like someone copied it without
thinking.)

>Then we have
>U+2460 -> U+24FF which are the enclosed alphanumerics.

Aren't these inherited from some character code - Japanese? If so,
politics may be more important for inclusion that typography.

 And of course in
>range U+2700 -> U+27BF we have all of ITC's Zapf Dingbats.

These are also odd. It can't be ITC Zapf dingbats that are encoded.
It must be some abstract dingbats - but I doubt that there are any.

Weird.

-- 
Anders Thulin       ath@linkoping.trab.se 
Telia Research AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Aug23.083110.28992@linkoping.trab.se>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!bloom-beacon!eru.mt.luth.se!hagbard!loglule!prosys!ath
References: <1992Aug20.013444.6313@adobe.com> <1992Aug21.054826.4016@adobe.com> <1992Aug21.173143.25986@adobe.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!bloom-beacon!eru.mt.luth.se!hagbard!loglule!prosys!ath
From: ath@linkoping.trab.se (Anders Thulin)
Newsgroups: comp.fonts
Subject: Re: font encoding morass
Message-ID: <1992Aug23.083110.28992@linkoping.trab.se>
Date: 23 Aug 92 08:31:10 GMT
References: <1992Aug20.013444.6313@adobe.com> <1992Aug21.054826.4016@adobe.com> <1992Aug21.173143.25986@adobe.com>
Organization: Telia Research AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden
Lines: 52