From: Michael \(michka\) Kaplan (michka@trigeminal.com)
Date: Sun Jul 20 2003 - 10:16:11 EDT
Well, I thought Arial Unicode MS is a little pricey for just putting it
anywhere? I may be wrong here (and I have no idea how much is costs,
really), but the huge size compared to megafonts like Code2000, which is
based in part on the "rich" Arial typeface heritage, also makes it a font of
some value and a legitimate "value add" where it is...
Of course, all of this is IMHO, as I have no real knowledge of what Office
or even nearby Typography think about any of these things....
MichKa [MS]
----- Original Message -----
From: <Peter_Constable@sil.org>
To: <unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 6:20 AM
Subject: Re: About the European MES-2 subset
> > On Windows, the "cannot find a font for it" situation is the NULL glyph.
> The
> > Last Resort font is cool but a Code2000 stab at the actual glyph is
> (IMHO)
> > cooler than both.:-)
>
> Then wouldn't it make sense for Arial Unicode MS to be included with
> Windows rather than just with Office?
>
>
>
> - Peter
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> Peter Constable
>
> Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
> 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
> Tel: +1 972 708 7485
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jul 20 2003 - 10:51:31 EDT