Philippe Verdy wrote, > Code2000 ... uses the same font-wide strategy for hinting also > creates lots of caveats: ...
Code2000 does not have hinting instructions; that's the font-wide strategy. > Finally the bad thing about Code2000 is about font metrics, notably > baselines: while you want to unify these baselines and line-heights, > you'll reach the point where some scripts are ridiculously too small > or improperly aligned ... Do you have an example of either? Is it possible that any improper alignment or disproportionate glyphs in your display are being caused by something other than the font? > Trying tro fix these metrics for one script will break another one > in that font ... Trying to fix something which isn't broken is generally a bad plan. I wonder if the bizarre behavior you're reporting might have been caused by some third party "fixing" something in the font. In a pan-Unicode font, the base of the CJK ideographs wouldn't be expected to match the baseline of alphabetic scripts. Likewise, the base of the stems used in Indic scripts shouldn't be expected to match the baseline of alphabetic scripts as Indic scripts don't use baselines. Rather, the glyphs in such a font might be designed so that, even with reasonable above and below marks/diacritics, there would be no excessive line gaps generated for the other scripts covered in the font. A font which made, for example, Tibetan base letters the same size as Latin letters would work just fine... as long as you don't mind that runs of Latin text displayed with the font would appear to have two or three line feeds inserted between each line. Best regards, James Kass