Markus Kuhn wrote:
>
> Keith Packard wrote on 2002-06-04 16:08 UTC:
> > At the font level, I can use the Type1 tables to map names to Unicode
> > codepoints for fonts which don't yet support Unicode 3.2 mappings for the
> > new entries. [...] I need to unify the Adobe glyph names with the
> > Mat
I am not too sure how this fits in the current discussion, but here are my
goals for a revision of the "Unicode and glyph names" document:
the current naming convention does not support the mapping to (sequences
of characters containing) supplemental characters (i.e. outside the BMP).
the
At 03:54 PM 6/5/2002 -0400, James H. Cloos Jr.
wrote:
>
"Markus" == Markus Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
Markus> It might be very worthwile to start updating the
PostScript
Markus> glyph names in the various TeX Type1 fonts to match
current
Markus> standards, as soon as Adobe has updated
Ma
> "Markus" == Markus Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Markus> It might be very worthwile to start updating the PostScript
Markus> glyph names in the various TeX Type1 fonts to match current
Markus> standards, as soon as Adobe has updated
Markus> http://partners.adobe.com/asn/developer/type
"James H. Cloos Jr." wrote on 2002-06-05 00:06 UTC:
> The (postscript versions of the) interesting math fonts
> I beleive all predate adobe's glyph naming recomendations. (At least
> for the TeX-related ones; I cannot speak definitively on mozilla's
> other set of recomended math fonts (by bitstr
> "Keith" == Keith Packard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Keith> Of the 231 unique glyph names in the blue sky math fonts, 66
Keith> are not represented in glyphnames.txt. ...
Keith> fontconfig already unifies multiple encoding tables into a
Keith> single unicode mapping function ...
Another i
Around 20 o'clock on Jun 4, "James H. Cloos Jr." wrote:
> Probably not. The (postscript versions of the) interesting math fonts
> I beleive all predate adobe's glyph naming recomendations. (At least
> for the TeX-related ones; I cannot speak definitively on mozilla's
> other set of recomended
> "Keith" == Keith Packard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Keith> I'm more interested in discovering whether the existing fonts
Keith> used for MathML include these [adobe recomended] glyph names so
Probably not. The (postscript versions of the) interesting math fonts
I beleive all predate adob
Around 21 o'clock on Jun 4, Markus Kuhn wrote:
> and (from what I heared) about to revise the entire thing to add the
> Unicode 3.2 mappings for many of the glyphs that were so far mapped into
> the Adobe Corporate Use Area. In case he has already a draft of that, it
> might save both you and th
Keith Packard wrote on 2002-06-04 16:08 UTC:
> At the font level, I can use the Type1 tables to map names to Unicode
> codepoints for fonts which don't yet support Unicode 3.2 mappings for the
> new entries. [...] I need to unify the Adobe glyph names with the
> MathML glyphs and the Unicode 3.2 s
10 matches
Mail list logo
