--- Keith Packard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
> Around 4 o'clock on May 30,
> =?iso-8859-1?q?Andrew=20Dunbar?= wrote:
>
> > > - The set of languages in the OS/2 table /
> FC_LANG
> > > is pitfully
> >
> > Can't you use coverage to determine this?
>
> Not easily. Traditional Chinese, simpli
* Andrew Dunbar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-05-30 04:52]:
> --- Owen Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
> > On the other hand, all we really care about is Simplified
> > Chinese/Traditional Chinese/Japanese/Korean so it may well be good
> > enough.
>
> For now yes. Romanian uses a "comma below"
Keith Packard wrote:
> > Can't you use coverage to determine this?
> Not easily. Traditional Chinese, simplified Chinese, Japanese and Korean
> fonts cover the same Unicode regions, and fonts for all of these languages
> generally cover only a fraction of the total space making any coverage
>
--- Owen Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
> Keith Packard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Around 14 o'clock on May 28, Owen Taylor wrote:
> >
> > > The one place where a fix is urgently needed is
> for Japanese
> > > vs. Traditional Chinese vs. Simplified Chinese;
> things look pretty
> >
Around 10 o'clock on May 30, Keith Packard wrote:
> I think I'll convert the branches to a packed representation and take the
> performance hit when searching. That should reduce memory usage for
> the branches from 664320 to 32403 bytes. I'll take the performance hit
> for the 630K savings;
Around 9 o'clock on May 31, Zenith Lau wrote:
> I have seem many times in this mailing list, on the term 'language tag'.
> But I don't know what is it. Would anyone mind explain a little bit for
> me??
This comes from the OS/2 tables which (I presume) come from the IBM OS/2
internationalization
Hello,
I have seem many times in this mailing list, on the term 'language tag'. But I don't
know what is it. Would anyone mind explain a little bit for me??
Zenith
___
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
Around 22 o'clock on May 30, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Joaqu=EDn?= Cuenca Abela wrote:
> is it only me, or xft-config.in (line 92) should be:
>
> libs="-lXft ...
Yes, that's correct -- someone else noted this a couple of days ago. The
fix is in CVS, but I haven't rebuilt the tarballs since then.
Keith
is it only me, or xft-config.in (line 92) should be:
libs="-lXft ...
instead of the current
libs="-lxft ...
?
Cheers,
--
Joaquín Cuenca Abela
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
Around 12 o'clock on May 30, Yao Zhang wrote:
> From your coverage map, it is easy to tell which category the font is in.
> But in my opinion, combining different Chinese fonts together to get
> a bigger coverage is generally not a good idea.
It's good to know we can intuit the language tag fro
The largest chunk of data needed for font matching is the Unicode coverage
for each font; this coverage is represented internally by a sparse bit
array stored in a btree -- each level of the btree represents one byte
from the unicode coverage, so trees are at most four levels deep.
At the bot
11 matches
Mail list logo
