[HarfBuzz] Unicode vs glyphs

[pravin.d.s at gmail.com]

On 14 June 2011 21:02, Shriramana Sharma <samjnaa at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 14-06-2011 20:59, Khaled Hosny wrote:
>
>> All the mentioned scripts can have fonts with glyphs that are not
>> assigned Unicode code points, you were lucky to not encounter them until
>> now, but in the era of "smart fonts" it is becoming more and more
>> common practice especially in high quality fonts.
>>
>> Regards,
>>  Khaled
>>
>
> Khaled, if I am correct to presume (from your name) that you know Arabic
> script, can you tell us whether you nowadays use the separately encoded
> compatibility presentation forms or you use smart font technologies to
> display those presentation forms? If I am not mistaken, Arabic has different
> written forms for characters in initial, middle, final and isolate positions
> (or am I thinking of Mongolian)?
>

Though arabic has got presentation form in Unicode, inputting these
characters will make it like CJK script.
So for ease of use, we must use the Open Type or AAT fonts.
Better if font developer use proper unicode values in fonts for these
intial/mid/final shapes.

And even arabic script sometimes required different shapes of init/mid/final
depending upon previous characters.

And if someone started thinking for Nastaliq script, he need lots of
glyphs(6 times more than indic scripts)

-
Pravin S



>
> --
> Shriramana Sharma
>
> _______________________________________________
> HarfBuzz mailing list
> HarfBuzz at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/harfbuzz/attachments/20110614/f6d3c17f/attachment.html>