Hi,
At 18 Jun 2002 17:55:27 +0100,
juliusz chroboczek wrote:
> TK> XFree86's table has additional codepoints to U+E7xx and U+E8xx,
> TK> which CP936 does not have. I don't know how to handle these
> TK> codepoints. (left unremoved?)
>
> I suggest going ahead and removing them. If somebody co
TK> XFree86's table has additional codepoints to U+E7xx and U+E8xx,
TK> which CP936 does not have. I don't know how to handle these
TK> codepoints. (left unremoved?)
I suggest going ahead and removing them. If somebody complains, we'll
know what they are for.
Hi,
At 17 Jun 2002 16:37:23 +0100,
juliusz chroboczek wrote:
> Quite possible, I'm the body who compiled the tables, and my knowledge
> of East-Asian encodings is superficial at best.
>
> I'll let you send a patch (and take responsibility for it).
I am now preparing a patch.
I found that GNU
On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
> Are there any standards how to encode (to develop fonts) Indic ligatures
> (combined glyphs) which don't have codepoints in Unicode/ISCII?
I don't think what MS does automatically becomes a/the standard, but
at least it has to be admitted that th
