Keith Packard wrote:
>
> I'm currently using a (bogus) set of language names in fontconfig.
>
> FC_LANG values are intended to solve two separate problems:
>
> 1) Identifying Han fonts with appropriate glyph shapes
>
> 2) Identifying fonts likely to hold all of the glyphs needed for
> a document.
>
> Clearly "LANG" is a misnomer here -- it's not language we're interested
> in, it's the character set. In particular, ISO 639 doesn't distinguish
> between simplified chinese and traditional chinese. So, we need to stir
> in the country code as well, much as one would when setting a locale name.
>
> I hate to promote the horrid ANSI-C locale model, but I don't see a great
> deal of choice here.
The OpenType/TrueType spec has been actively in use for a while
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otspec/os2.htm#cpr
and certainly hints at a set of languages. Seeing as many web
pages are designed on/for Microsoft Windows systems it seems
likely that many web pages will implicitly use these language
sets.
> In addition, I'm thinking of automatically adding information
> from the current locale to font patterns which don't specify a
> lang value. With the new strong/weak FC_FAMILY bindings, this
> means that generic family names will now match a locale-specific
> face, which seems like the right plan.
This seems reasonable. If a Japanese user wanted the ASCII
text in Helvetica and the Japanese text in Mincho how would
they specify this?
Brian Stell
_______________________________________________
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
