On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Keith Packard wrote: > Yeah, probably. Is there a compact representation for all of the > combining characters? The Unicode General Category of the characters can tell you that. I can prepare a compact table if you need. > Or should we just permit advances of 0 for any > character? The latter would be far easier, and would follow the method > used to identify dual-spaced fonts, while the former might avoid > mis-identifying some broken fonts. I prefer the latter. Moreover, there was the discussion of monospace fonts on the OpenType list last week. Seems like according to the OpenType spec, a monospace font should have all the widths equal, no zero width allowed. Combining characters can get their width zeroed using OpenType tables. There were suggestions to change this behavior though. > -keith --behdad http://behdad.org/ _______________________________________________ fontconfig mailing list fontconfig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/fontconfig
