On 08/01/2002 02:34:17 PM Kenneth Whistler wrote:
>But if you insist on having a code point to stick directly in >a sentence like that above, I'd take the cue from James Kass: > >> The missing glyph is the first glyph in any font. This is mapped to >> U+0000 and the system correctly substitutes the glyph mapped to >> U+0000 any time a font being used lacks an outline for a called >> character. I think James is mistaken on this point: the missing glyph *is* the first glyph in any TTF, but it is *not* necessarily (probably not typically) mapped from U+0000. For instance, in Times New Roman, Arial, Tahoma and even James' own Code2000, the first entry in the cmap is for U+0020: ; TrueType v1.0 Dump Program - v1.60, Jul 10 1995, rrt, dra, gch, ddb, lcp ; Copyright (C) 1991 ZSoft Corporation. All rights reserved. ; Portions Copyright (C) 1991-1995 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. ; Dumping file 'code2000.ttf' [snip] Which Means: 1. Char 0020 -> Index 3 Char 0021 -> Index 4 [snip] On the other hand, not being explicitly mapped from a character means that it is effectively implicitly mapped from a character. So, >Thus, you have a reasonably good chance that if you try to >purposefully display the character U+0000, you will get the >missing glyph for the font in use. (Unless the application is >filtering out NULL characters.) is probably valid. - Peter --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485 E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>