At 12:49 PM 03-08-02, Doug Ewell wrote: >This is precisely one of the points I was trying to make in the >ZWJ-ligation thread a few weeks ago. It would be improper for Unicode >to do *anything* on the basis of "font technology X solves the problem". >(Some were suggesting ZWJ was unnecessary for ligation control because >the required intelligence could be built into OpenType fonts, which >implies that OpenType is a core component of Unicode.)
This goes both ways, though. My own objection to some of the ZWJ stuff, particularly in TR27, was that the UTC were providing 'implementation notes' that were clearly targeted at 'font technology X' (or multiple font technologies based on the same model, i.e. lookup-driven ligature substitution), while displaying an incomplete understanding of that technology. John Hudson Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com Vancouver, BC [EMAIL PROTECTED] Language must belong to the Other -- to my linguistic community as a whole -- before it can belong to me, so that the self comes to its unique articulation in a medium which is always at some level indifferent to it. - Terry Eagleton
