On Wed, 31 May 2000, Roger So wrote: > Although I have an XLC_LOCALE for Big5HKSCS that works for me at the > moment, it requires users to have a single font that includes both > standard Big5 and HKSCS extension characters. I have been lucky to > have such a "unified" font; however I don't think it would be useful > for other people since generally HKSCS fonts are distributed > separately from standard Big5 fonts. > > I'm now working on an XLC_LOCALE that lets X use standard Big5 fonts > for "standard" characters (0xA1xx-0xF9xx), and extended fonts for > other characters. However I don't know how to get X to distinguish > between these two character ranges.
I don't know either, but maybe you are looking for something like the "font-linking" in Mozilla or Java, if one is to use more than two font files. Perhaps the Big5 + HKSCS situation can be handled like how the Japanese EUC-JP encoding works, which includes the JIS X 0208 and JIS X 0212 character sets, but there are separate font files for those two character sets (with different XFLD names). Or the Taiwanese EUC-TW encoding, which has the CNS 11643 character set, but each plane is a separate font file with its own XFLD. In other words, keep the Big5 font as one font with a "big5" XFLD and the HKSCS font as a second font with a "hkscs" XFLD or something, and define a new character set like "big5hkscs" which has to know to get glyphs from those two fonts/xfld's. Just as one wouldn't use JIS X 0212 alone or CNS 11643 plane 5 alone, one isn't going to use HKSCS by itself. And a question of my own... I do have a question about the ranges, though--does the basic Big5 ranges include the ETen extensions in C6A1-C8D3 (kana and other symbols), and F9D6-F9FE (seven hanzi and boxes)? It seems like a de facto extension, and some "Big5" fonts out there include some or part of it. (Ones from Microsoft don't include the C6A1-C8D3 part, but only the latter.) Other fonts include it but are marked with "ETen" in the XFLD somewhere, and even some marked that way are actually missing them. HKSCS in http://www.digital21.gov.hk/eng/hkscs/download/e_hkscs.pdf apparently includes all of the Eten extensions (see pages 2-41 to 2-44) as part of its definition, as well as adding new stuff to the C8 row. I recall that Big5+ also included the Eten extensions as well. So, does this mean that the ETen extensions are a "de facto" standard, reinforced by post-Big5 standards that include it as a subset, and we assume "Big5" fonts without them are "broken"? What if one is using one of these "Big5" fonts that don't have all of the ETen extensions, in conjunction with a HKSCS font, but because of the way the coderanges are defined, one can't make use of the available glyphs in the latter? Thomas Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- | This message was re-posted from [email protected] | and converted from big5 to gb2312 by an automatic gateway.
