Forwarding for public archival. See also
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jul/0518.html
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Aug/0213.html

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: IVS registry
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:44:44 -0800
From: fantasai
To: Steve Zilles

Proposal for improving IVS registry so that it doesn't make font designers
and typesetters cry:

  1. Allow multiple registrations per IVS codepoint, so that a registrant
     can register a glyph collection that overlaps with an existing collection
     without creating duplicate IVS registrations for shared glyphs.

  2. Require all glyph variant registrations to include an explanation of
     exactly how the proposed glyph variant registration differs from all
     other registered glyph variants. If the proposed glyph variant is in fact
     identical (i.e. the registrant cannot describe any difference between
     the proposed glyph and the existing glyph, other than the typeface style)
     to an existing glyph variant, then the registration must use the same
     IVS codepoint as the already-registered glyph.

  3. Create a mapping table that states which already-registered variants
     are identical to each other, and whether any of these are identical
     to fully-encoded characters anywhere in the Unicode repertoire. (This
     mapping may be updated as new characters are added to Unicode or
     mistakes are found.)

  4. Ideally, deprecate the use of all but one of the IVS codepoints in each
     set of duplicates, so that future content will be iteroperable.

This has several important effects:
  1. Tells font designers which differences between registered glyphs are
     significant, as opposed to stylistic, so that they can design glyphs
     that correctly honor these differences.
  2. Prevents duplicate registrations, which avoids wasting IVS codepoints.
  3. Provides a canonical representation of the text without losing any
     information about the author-intended glyph variants, facilitating
     interchange.
  4. Creates a standardized, reviewed mapping so that glyph lookups in
     applications can accurately look up a particular variant in a font
     even if it is indexed under a different IVS.

~fantasai





Reply via email to