Keith Packard wrote:
>
> Around 8 o'clock on Nov 21, Brian Stell wrote:
>
> > I look at the ulUnicodeRange fields, which list the supported
> > "codepages", to get a language hint.
> > http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otspec/os2.htm
> > While this looks to be useful I do not have enough in-field use
> > to speak authoritatively either way.
>
> Hmm. That table seems to only hint at which glyphs are available in the
> font; not what languages the font is "designed" for. Given that I'm
> already computing the actual set of glyphs in every font (at some
> considerable expense), it's not clear how I should approach this new
> information.
I agree that the bits in the ulUnicodeRange fields do not
directly indicate a language. They do indicate the Microsoft
encodings that the font is supposed to cover and this is a
strong language hint. For example bit 11 or ulUnicodeRange1 is
marked "Hebrew". Compare this to trying to infer the language
from a set of Unicode code points where the relationship is
much vaguer.
> Here's a thought -- those bits might form a helpful shorthand notation for
> unicode subsets; right now, I've no convenient representation for them.
You might also look here to see how ICU named the Unicode ranges:
http://oss.software.ibm.com/cvs/icu/icu/source/layout/loengine.cpp?annotate=1.1&sortby=rev
Do note that these are Unicode ranges and have a very
indirect/loose relationship with languages or scripts.
--
Brian Stell
_______________________________________________
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
