Curtis Clark wrote:
> "Until I converted Jarkko's text, I wondered if he wasn't trying to
> make a Unicode form of rot13, so that readers could choose not to be
> offended. Torsten, when will Unipad support converting the U+
> format?"
U+ is the standard way to talk about Unicode code p
Edward H Trager wrote as follows.
> ... I was also thinking
>about the issue of how do you get the highly qualified designers
>interested in such a project?
In answer to the specific question.
One might consider the possibility of offering them a fee-paid assessment of
a portfolio of their work
At 15:38 -0400 2002-08-30, Edward H Trager wrote:
>I was also thinking about the issue of how do you get the highly
>qualified designers interested in such a project?
Um. Pay them?
:-)
Maybe this thread should go offline.
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
Edward H. Trager wrote,
> ... I was also thinking
> about the issue of how do you get the highly qualified designers
> interested in such a project?
>
₥¤₦€¥ ₮A₤₭$
Best regards,
James Kass.
Michka is right. The "free font" vs "commercial font" argument comes
from the TYPO-L list, and probably isn't appropriate to this forum.
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Michael Everson wrote:
> At 11:00 -0400 2002-08-30, Edward H Trager wrote:
>
> >The solution is to use collaborative Open Source development methodologies
> >to produce one or more high-quality, operating system and vendor-neutral
> >TTF and OpenType unicode fonts. Resultin
I wrote:
> Until I c
...
Some of you had as much trouble with my XML entities as I might have had
with Jarkko's U+ codes. Here is the transliteration:
"Until I converted Jarkko's text, I wondered if he wasn't trying to make
a Unicode form of rot13, so that readers could choose not to be
offe
From: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Only because so few people think that fonts are worth paying for that
> people who really OUGHT to be earning their living by making fonts
> have to do other things. There's something really wrong with that
> model. Isn't there?
Of course, one could
ect: RE: Romanized Cyrillic bibliographic data--viable fonts?)
> > And who pays the poor font designer for his work?
>
> U+0041 U+006C U+0074 U+0072 U+0075 U+0069 U+0073 U+006D U+0020 U+006F
U+0072 U+0020 U+006B U+0075 U+0064 U+006F U+0073 U+002C U+0020 U+006D U+0061
U+0079 U+0062 U+0065 U+003F
>
>
>
At 13:35 -0400 2002-08-30, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Kudos do not pay the rent. And altruism can run out when the rent
>> needs to be paid ;-)
>
>Very true. But you make the hasty assumption that font designing is the
>activity creating the money for paying the rent.
Only because so f
> Kudos do not pay the rent. And altruism can run out when the rent
> needs to be paid ;-)
Very true. But you make the hasty assumption that font designing is the
activity creating the money for paying the rent.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>And who pays the poor font designer for his work?
>
>
> U+0041 U+006C U+0074 U+0072 U+0075 U+0069 U+0073 U+006D U+0020 U+006F U+0072 U+0020
>U+006B U+0075 U+0064 U+006F U+0073 U+002C U+0020 U+006D U+0061 U+0079 U+0062 U+0065
>U+003F
Reminds me of a line by a standup
At 12:03 -0400 2002-08-30, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And who pays the poor font designer for his work?
>
>U+0041 U+006C U+0074 U+0072 U+0075 U+0069 U+0073 U+006D U+0020
>U+006F U+0072 U+0020 U+006B U+0075 U+0064 U+006F U+0073 U+002C
>U+0020 U+006D U+0061 U+0079 U+0062 U+0065 U+003F
"Altru
> And who pays the poor font designer for his work?
U+0041 U+006C U+0074 U+0072 U+0075 U+0069 U+0073 U+006D U+0020 U+006F U+0072 U+0020
U+006B U+0075 U+0064 U+006F U+0073 U+002C U+0020 U+006D U+0061 U+0079 U+0062 U+0065
U+003F
At 11:00 -0400 2002-08-30, Edward H Trager wrote:
>The solution is to use collaborative Open Source development methodologies
>to produce one or more high-quality, operating system and vendor-neutral
>TTF and OpenType unicode fonts. Resulting fonts would be copyrighted and
>released under a well
This message is in response to the previous messages in this thread.
There *IS* a viable solution to the whole problem of "adding a few extra
characters" to a font without having to wade into the potential legal
morass of individual font vendor's intellectual property rights:
The solution is to
I'll summarize what I think the mail is about interspersed with my
opinions.
William Overington wrote:
1) Quotes mail from Kass and Constable
2) Summarizes same mail.
3) Questions if James suggestion to ask font developer for additional
character is practical.
In my experience it is. Clearly
Peter Constable wrote as follows.
>On 08/27/2002 12:08:09 AM "James Kass" wrote:
>
>>William Overington has mentioned the Softy editor. Please keep
>>in mind that fonts are copyrighted material, and, mostly users
>>are forbidden to modify them, even for internal use purposes.
>>
>>The best way t
Hi John,
>> ... which, unfortunately, could probably use better distribution than
>> the present scheme. It's an excellent font, apart from a few issues
>> with hinting and the like, but it's impossible to find unless you know
>> where you have to look for it.
JC> Googling for "Everson Mono" fou
Philipp Reichmuth scripsit:
> JK> Everson Mono.
>
> ... which, unfortunately, could probably use better distribution than
> the present scheme. It's an excellent font, apart from a few issues
> with hinting and the like, but it's impossible to find unless you know
> where you have to look for it
JK> While awaiting Latin OpenType support, it might be a good idea to
JK> take a look at a well populated fixed width pan-Unicode font like
JK> Everson Mono.
... which, unfortunately, could probably use better distribution than
the present scheme. It's an excellent font, apart from a few issues
On 08/27/2002 12:08:09 AM "James Kass" wrote:
>William Overington has mentioned the Softy editor. Please keep
>in mind that fonts are copyrighted material, and, mostly users
>are forbidden to modify them, even for internal use purposes.
>
>The best way to get characters added to a font is to ask
James Kass wrote as follows.
>Unless a font is fixed width, Latin combiners can't currently
>consistently combine well without "smart font technology"
>support enabled on the system. So, don't blame the Arial
>Unicode MS font if these glyphs don't always merge well.
>
>While awaiting Latin OpenT
J. M. Craig wrote,
> ... If anyone has access to
> the Arial Unicode MS font and can check to see if U+FE20 and U+FE21
> combine properly, I'd be grateful--I don't want to spend the money to
> get it if it won't solve the display problem!
>
Unless a font is fixed width, Latin combiners can'
James Kass wrote,
> ...would become:
>
> Unicode 0078 0360 0077
>
>
U+0360 is the double wide combining tilde.
U+0361 is the double wide combining inverted breve.
Oops.
Best regards,
James Kass.
Thanks for the suggestion--of U+0361 (I don't think U+0360 is going to
do what I want terribly well). I'm assuming that U+0361 IS in your font
(I hadn't checked yet). One of the problems with that approach is that I
don't have enough control over the conversion algorithm to make that
work--or
J. M. Craig wrote,
> ... The ultimate problem is, I can't find an available font
> that properly supports the combining half marks FE20 and FE21.
>
Why not use U+0360 and U+0361 instead?
> /ts/
> Unicode 0078 FE20 0077 FE21
>
...would become:
Unicode 0078 0360 0077
... or, three ch
J M Craig wrote as follows.
[snipped]
>Any suggestions welcomed! Is there a tool out there that will allow you
>to edit a font to add a couple of missing characters?
You might like to have a look at Softy, which is a shareware font editor for
TrueType fonts. Softy can be used to produce new Tr
At 07:27 -0600 2002-08-26, J M Craig wrote:
>Any suggestions welcomed! Is there a tool out there that will allow
>you to edit a font to add a couple of missing characters?
The choices are, in general, buying font programs or hiring someone
to modify your font for you.
Having said that, it wou
> Gory details:
> ...
> The specified Romanization for each of these Cyrillic characters
> includes a ligature over the top of the two Latin code points in
> question (to indicate that the Latin characters represent a single
> Cyrillic character presumably).
>
If you can use horizontal bars ove
Anyone at all familiar with bibliographical data (the MARC standards)
knows that they can be a real pain to deal with. In this case, the
difficulty isn't with the MARC data itself, but with the Library of
Congress's Romanization standards and the lack of support for combining
half marks in ava
31 matches
Mail list logo
