The OpenType spec doesn’t not in any way suggest that the bits be used that
way. It’s impossible to assert that there are no applications out there that do
that, but I wouldn’t expect there to be many widely-used apps that do that
today.
On the other hand, something that the bits might affect a
I agree that the 'dlng' is far better than this old legacy bitset (which
was defined in a time where all Unicode was in the BMP, and the envisioned
CJK extended blocks outside the BMP were assumed to be handled by the bits
defined for CJK).
At least 'dlng' is intended to indicate if a font support
I bet these bit sets are just for legacy applications depending on these
for detecting support for the scripts encoded in it with a simple test.
I've not seen if there was a standard extension approved for this legacy
bitset.
For detecting support in other scripts not encoded in these bitsets, you
Does the ulUnicodeRange bits get used to dictate rendering behavior or
script recognition?
I am just wondering about whether the lack of bits to indicate an Adlam
charset can cause other issues in applications.
-Neil
On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 1:00 PM, via Unicode wrote:
> Send Unicode mailing
Michael Everson wrote:
> Why on earth would they use Ch and Sh when 1) C isn’t used by itself
> and 2) if you’re using Ǵǵ you may as well use Çç Şş.
Philippe Verdy wrote:
> The three versions of the Cyrilic letter i is mapped to 1.5
> (distinguished only on lowercase with the Turkic lowercase do
You have clarified what exactly the usage is; you've only asked what it means
to cover a script.
James Kass mentioned a font's OS/2 table. That is obsolete: as Khaled pointed
out, there has never been a clear definition of "supported" and practice has
been inconsistent. Moreover, the available
6 matches
Mail list logo
