Hi Vincent, these alternatives are only taken as a last resort before mentioning that a glyph cannot be found. Unicode does list "minus" (Unicode: 2212, MINUS-SIGN) to be related to "hyphen" (Unicode: 002D, HYPHEN-MINUS). Otherwise, I wouldn't have made the change. The change is also not about replacing minus for a hyphen, but for the other way around. I can of course add a warning if an alternative glyph is used. But I guess some people would find the warning welcome while others might find it a nuisance. Can we get some additional opinions to reach an informed decision, please?
On 02.12.2008 12:22:29 Vincent Hennebert wrote: > Hi Jeremias, > > > Author: jeremias > > Date: Mon Dec 1 08:00:50 2008 > > New Revision: 722108 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=722108&view=rev > > Log: > > Added "minus" as an alternative for "hyphen" & Co. > > Why? minus has nothing to do with hyphen, and the result is likely to > look terrible. I think I would prefer to have a warning rather than > a silent replacement. Anyway, if a font doesn’t even define a glyph for > hyphen, then I doubt it will define one for the true minus. > > <snip/> > > Vincent Jeremias Maerki --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
