At 12:49 PM 03-08-02, Doug Ewell wrote:
>This is precisely one of the points I was trying to make in the
>ZWJ-ligation thread a few weeks ago. It would be improper for Unicode
>to do *anything* on the basis of "font technology X solves the problem".
>(Some were suggesting ZWJ was unnecessary for ligation control because
>the required intelligence could be built into OpenType fonts, which
>implies that OpenType is a core component of Unicode.)
This goes both ways, though. My own objection to some of the ZWJ stuff,
particularly in TR27, was that the UTC were providing 'implementation
notes' that were clearly targeted at 'font technology X' (or multiple font
technologies based on the same model, i.e. lookup-driven ligature
substitution), while displaying an incomplete understanding of that technology.
John Hudson
Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
Vancouver, BC tiro@tiro.com
Language must belong to the Other -- to my linguistic community
as a whole -- before it can belong to me, so that the self comes to its
unique articulation in a medium which is always at some level
indifferent to it. - Terry Eagleton
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sat Aug 03 2002 - 14:17:46 EDT