Jungshik Shin scripsit:
> > I don't know why UniScribe is not always installed by default,
> > as it is also useful for Latin, Greek and Cyrillic (the regional
>
>Add Korean to the list. After making a Korean opentype font,
> I was confused because it worked fine inside font editing tools,
>
Philippe Verdy wrote:
> Good luck with ISO language codes which does not even
> define them, and contain many duplicate codes even in
> the Alpha-2 space (he/iw, in/id), or unprecize codes
> matching sometimes very imprecize families of languages
> overlapping other language codes...
The codes "
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Philippe Verdy wrote:
> On Friday, July 11, 2003 12:14 PM, Jungshik Shin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For instance, on Win 9x/ME, MS IE that (appears to) use Uniscribe
> > APIs directly can render complex scripts but Mozilla that uses
> > standard Win32 Text APIs (such a
- Original Message -
From: "Don Osborn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I've come back to my mailbox a bit amazed to find so much mail on this
> address issue. I'd have to agree with Peter's last on the topic - not to
> prolong the thread (!) but to pick up on his description of Gabon as a
> coun
I've come back to my mailbox a bit amazed to find so much mail on this
address issue. I'd have to agree with Peter's last on the topic - not to
prolong the thread (!) but to pick up on his description of Gabon as a
country "not particularly known for involvement in this industry." Is there
any lik
On Friday, July 11, 2003 6:43 PM, Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Agreed. But does Unicode actually treat them as non-normative samples?
Note clear here: the reference documents say that these tables are
normative for applications that want to implement a conforming
case folding. But UTR#
On 11/07/2003 08:51, Philippe Verdy wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2003 3:50 PM, Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So I hope that what is fixed by Unicode is the name not
of two languages but of an extensible family of scripts.
I think you speak about family of languages?
Not really. A se
Ah, but what you don't realise [and it's not surprising, because MSDN
doesn't make it clear] is that when ScriptTextOut calls ExtTextOut, it
passes glyph indices, and uses the ETO_GLYPH_INDEX option.
Thus, the two statements are perfectly consistent. For once, Philippe's
bold statement of fact i
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 13:15:14 +0200, "Philippe Verdy" wrote:
> The Win32 Text APIs (such as TextOut) actually DO support UniScribe
> transparently on Windows XP... In most applications, this means that the
> UniScribe support works without requiring explicit calls to the Uniscribe API.
Surely some
On Friday, July 11, 2003 3:50 PM, Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I hope that what is fixed by Unicode is the name not
> of two languages but of an extensible family of scripts.
I think you speak about family of languages?
Good luck with ISO language codes which does not even
define th
Ran across a place that has a number of language kits for Mac OS X,
including Burmese, Cherokee, Inuktitut, Kannada, Malayalam, Telugu, and
Tibetan. I haven't seen any blurbs about them anywhere...
http://www.xenotypetech.com
Rick
On 11/07/2003 05:56, Philippe Verdy wrote:
Note also: the Soft_Dotted property was created and considered
specially for Turkish and Azeri.
Whatever it was that was specially created or adjusted for Turkish and
Azeri, was it specifically restricted to these two languages? These are
I think
On Friday, July 11, 2003 1:12 PM, Kent Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Note also: the Soft_Dotted property was created and considered
> > specially for Turkish and Azeri.
>
> Adding to the long, and unfortunately getting longer, list of
> misleading statements from Philippe! No, the reas
> The Win32 Text APIs (such as TextOut) actually DO support
> UniScribe transparently on Windows XP... In most applications,
> this means that the UniScribe support works without requiring
> explicit calls to the Uniscribe API.
And Windows2000. However some ways of using the Text APIs will meant t
> Note also: the Soft_Dotted property was created and considered
> specially for Turkish and Azeri.
Adding to the long, and unfortunately getting longer, list of misleading
statements from Philippe! No, the reason for the Soft_Dotted property
was/is to mark which characters (regardless of langua
On Friday, July 11, 2003 12:14 PM, Jungshik Shin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 'OS' here has to be interpreted a bit broadly to include 'APIs and
> toolkits' used in text rendering. I guess that's what you meant.
>
> For instance, on Win 9x/ME, MS IE that (appears to) use Uniscribe
> APIs directly
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Andrew Cunningham wrote:
> Although the actual application of the theory will differ from operating
> system to operating system.
'OS' here has to be interpreted a bit broadly to include 'APIs and
toolkits' used in text rendering. I guess that's what you meant.
For instanc
17 matches
Mail list logo
