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 <[email protected]> wrote: > Send Unicode mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Unicode digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: metric for block coverage (Norbert Lindenberg via Unicode) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Norbert Lindenberg via Unicode <[email protected]> > To: Khaled Hosny <[email protected]> > Cc: James Kass <[email protected]>, Adam Borowski < > [email protected]>, Unicode Public <[email protected]>, Norbert > Lindenberg <[email protected]> > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:15:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: metric for block coverage > > > On Feb 18, 2018, at 3:26 , Khaled Hosny via Unicode <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 02:14:46AM -0800, James Kass via Unicode wrote: > >> Adam Borowski wrote, > >> > >>> I'm looking for a way to determine a font's coverage of available > scripts. > >>> It's probably reasonable to do this per Unicode block. Also, it's a > safe > >>> assumption that a font which doesn't know a codepoint can do no complex > >>> shaping of such a glyph, thus looking at just codepoints should be > adequate > >>> for our purposes. > >> > >> You probably already know that basic script coverage information is > >> stored internally in OpenType fonts in the OS/2 table. > >> > >> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/opentype/spec/os2 > >> > >> Parsing the bits in the "ulUnicodeRange..." entries may be the > >> simplest way to get basic script coverage info. > > > > Though this might not be very reliable since OpenType does not have a > > definition of what it means for a Unicode block to be supported; some > > font authoring tools use a percentage, others use the presence of any > > characters in the range, and fonts might even provide incorrect data for > > any reason. > > > > However, I don’t think script or block coverage is that useful, what > > users are usually interested in is the language coverage. > > > > Regards, > > Khaled > > > All true. In addition, ulUnicodeRange ran out of bits around Unicode 5.1, > so scripts/blocks added to Unicode after that, such as Javanese, Tangut, or > Adlam, cannot be represented. > > Norbert > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Unicode mailing list > [email protected] > http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode > >
