On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 10:57:45AM +0100, Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: > > David Perry wrote: (concerning the current version of Fontspec : > full text at-end) > > and I left the message flagged for attention because there were > points raised in it that suggested that at present, Fontspec may > be adopting a sub-optimal approach in some cases. In particular, > David wrote : > > >At first I told him to include > > > >\fontspec[Script=Devanagari]{Devanagari MT} > > > >but later realized that's only for OT. The second paragraph of 10.17 > >does mention this, but a footnote or parenthetical remark ("Don't do > >this with AAT fonts!") might save people like me who work almost > >exclusively with OT from making silly mistakes. > > In an ideal world, would not the syntax requirws for OT, AAT, and any > other format font, be identical, and should it not be the responsibility > of the font-handling package (Fontspec, in this case) to convert the > universal syntax to the particular syntax needed by the actual > instance of the font found ? If others agree that this is desirable, > I wonder whether I might be permitted to raise it as a requested > feature for a future major release of Fontspec ?
AAT fonts has no notion of scripts and languages, feature tags etc. It is a completely different world, IMO it is not possible to have a "universal syntax" (there are also graphite fonts) without losing format specific functionality. Regards, Khaled -- Khaled Hosny Arabic localiser and member of Arabeyes.org team Free font developer -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex