Article View: comp.fonts
Article #720Re: font encoding morass
From: Anders Thulin
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 08:31
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 08:31
52 lines
2594 bytes
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!athReferences:
<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