From: Andrew West (andrewcwest@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Nov 19 2008 - 04:44:28 CST
2008/11/18 Kenneth Whistler <kenw@sybase.com>:
>
> Andrew West responded:
>
>> <http://www.unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/NamedSequences.txt>
>
> To which my comment is assuredly not. Unicode named sequences
> are not nor have they ever been intended to serve as
> guidance for font developers about what glyphs should or should
> not be supported for fonts.
UAX 34 (which you wrote) would seem support your confident assertion
that named sequences are not intended to act as guidance for font
developers. But I wonder how widely accepted this orthodoxy is amongst
UTC members.
For example, on Saturday 10th September 2005 Mark Davis wrote on the
Unicode list <http://unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2005-m09/0190.html>
:
"I think we are in agreement on named sequences; they should give
guidance to font developers as to which char sequences may need a
precomposed glyph."
Perhaps in the intervening three years his understanding of named
sequences has changed, but this statement on the public Unicode list
by the president of the Unicode Consotium has certainly informed my
understanding of what named sequences are about.
Andrew
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 19 2008 - 04:47:34 CST