[Fontconfig] Can we use base 16, and not 85, for ASCII charset representations?

[Akira TAGOH]

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:22 AM, W. Trevor King <wking at tremily.us> wrote:
> So you think the:
>
>   <page>: <mask>
>
> syntax is too verbose in hex?  I can't think of a good alternative off

Yes. it depends on how many glyphs a font has though, several tens of
thousand hex code as the output is too much.

> the top of my head without dropping information, and I don't think we
> want different output format for:
>
>   $ fc-list <pattern> charset
>
> compared to the element-less invocations.

That said adding another format pattern for more details isn't that
bad idea IMHO if it helps.

-- 
Akira TAGOH