Tirhuta (linked to: Re: Non-standard 8-bit fonts still in use)

Marcel Schneider charupdate at orange.fr
Sat Oct 17 06:28:21 CDT 2015

On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 09:20:13 +0100, Richard Wordingham  wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 20:22:08 -0400
> Don Osborn  wrote:
> > I was surprised to learn of continued reference to and presumably use
> > of 8-bit fonts modified two decades ago for the extended Latin
> > alphabets of Malian languages, and wondered if anyone has similar
> > observations in other countries. Or if there have been any recent
> > studies of adoption of Unicode fonts in the place of local 8-bit
> > fonts for extended Latin (or non-Latin) in local language computing.
> Non-Unicode fonts have been particularly resilient in Indic scripts,
> though I'm not sure what the current state of play is. I'm not sure
> that they are particularly '8-bit', but rather, they re-use the more
> accessible codes.
> Although these font schemes generally have the disadvantage that plain
> text is not supported, in the Indic world they do have advantages over
> Unicode:
> 1) What you type is what you get. Indic rearrangement irritates a lot
> of people. Several Tai scripts have successfully resisted it, but
> Indians have been suppressed by the influence of ISCII.

Does this mean that OpenType fonts are "overscripted" and that glyph reordering and glyph substitution are not appreciated?

If so, the best seems to me to convert legacy fonts to Unicode conformant fonts without scripting them. 
Or to provide kind of a *stable input* option that disables the advanced behaviour.



[First in thread: http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2015-m09/0155.html]

[Previous in thread: http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2015-m09/0156.html]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20151017/2bee2893/attachment.html>

More information about the Unicode mailing list