[OpenFontLibrary] Kickin it oldstyle

[Peter Baker]

Nate,

I don't think there is a standard any more. I'm not absolutely sure
about this specific case, but what Adobe is currently recommending for
variants of this kind is to put them in unencoded slots and make them
available via OpenType features. And the problems with the Unicode PUA
are such that I believe that is the best solution. With MS Word now
supporting OpenType, along with Apple Works and Mellel (when oh when
will Libre/Open/NeoOffice catch up?), there's little reason not to
take this route.

Peter Baker

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Nathan Willis <nwillis at glyphography.com> wrote:
> Question:: I'm preparing for the next release of News Cycle, my News
> Gothic revival (http://www.glyphography.com/fonts/), which mostly will
> be about adding Cyrillic.  But I'm currently killing time waiting for
> feedback from alpha-testers, so I've been adding miscellaneous glyphs
> that interest me for one reason or another (math symbols, currency,
> etc., etc.).
>
> I was considering adding text figures to that list, thinking "hey, it's
> only ten," but the problem is, I'm not sure where to put them.
> Wikipedia (which is where I get all of my information not gleaned from
> mailing lists) says Adobe uses U+f643--U+f64c, while STIX uses
> U+0e261--U+0e288.  Is Adobe's more "standard" -- have other fonts
> adopted that range to any meaningful degree?  Are there other factors
> worth considering?
>
> Thanks,
> Nate
>
> --
> nathan.p.willis
> nwillis at glyphography.com
> aim/ym/gtalk:n8willis
> identi.ca/n8
>
>