On 4 November 2011 16:46, jitendra <jituv...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > I wish to stick my neck out and make some exploratory , though humble > statements. > The issue of complex script not being enabled in various OSes and interfaces > is linked to font. I mean if unicode had been truly font-independent or at > least if unicode had been dependent on only truly free fonts (of complex > script), the problem could be resolved. > Opentype, Open Font(ISO) as also the Harfbuzz all orginate from the same > proprietary standard . > Is that the reason why many systems cannot adopt complex (i.e.Indian) > sctipts readily? > What is the way out? > Response from several Indian government bodies (including most importantly > TDIL in DIT) is lukewarm , so far at least. > > > regards
Jitendra Unicode, which is a character encoding not a glyph encoding standard, *is* font independent - and even font technology independent. OpenType, AAT, and Graphite fonts can all render Unicode text for complex scripts. OpenType is an openly available specification for fonts which anyone can use without paying a licence to adobe or microsoft who maintain the specification Systems can adopt OpenType readily. All Indian scripts work fine on my Nokia N900 which runs Linux. For some reason though Google crippled Android by not including support for OpenType font rendering - or support fo any alternative technology. I don't know about TDIL - they should be taking the lead in this by insisting handsets sold in India can support Indic scripts - Chris Thimphu, Bhutan