From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Sun Nov 03 2002 - 07:34:27 EST
On 11/02/2002 04:43:40 PM Thomas Lotze wrote:
>I don't see any harm in assigning standard UVs to ligatures
>other than that users who don't understand the difference between font
>encoding and text encoding will be encouraged to use them in documents.
I don't consider that harm insignficant. Also, what's the benefit? The
only benefit I can see is a very temporary one: older software does not
support rendering via smart-font technologies, thus can only display
glyphs that are directly encoded. Even in that situations, I'd probably
just use one of Adobe's expert set fonts (old wine for old wine skins)
rather than create new fonts with ligatures encoded as PUA characters.
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 03 2002 - 08:12:15 EST