Markus Kuhn wrote:
> If you want to have a "World Glyph List", you'll probably have
> to take full Unicode 3.0 and remove all the compatibility
> characters.
Plus, of course, all the extra glyphs needed for:
- "contextual variants": multiple glyphs representing the same character, depending on the context (surrounding characters, directionality, language, etc.).
- "ligatures" (glyphs representing special sequences of characters).
- "style variants" (e.g. italic, bold, etc.).
- etc.
It has been said many times, however, that such a list is necessarily arbitrary: different implementation may have different sets of glyphs, all equally valid for the desired calligraphic or typographic tradition.
I think, however, that it should be possible to define a *minimal* set of glyphs for the limited goal of *bare readability* for all Unicode's scripts.
This has been discussed a lot of times, directly or indirectly, but I always like reading more opinions about this idea.
_ Marco
______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT