W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2011

RE: [css3-writing-modes] The original issues of font-dependent glyph orientation

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 19:44:11 -0400
To: Eric Muller <emuller@adobe.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A592E245B36A8949BDB0A302B375FB4E0CF6977792@MAILR001.mail.lan>
> Looking at the current 'vert' lookups, the entries that are not for T
> characters are not doing more than rotating the glyphs; in other word,
> even if that feature existed today, it seems that the existing fonts
> would not use it.

This is one of the points I'm not sure today and I want to make sure.

I'm having some conversations with some font designers and here're some questions I've got:
1. Does this affect vhal/valt[1]? There might be some fonts that use GPOS in these features.
2. Some hand-writing-style fonts use different glyphs for vertical flow. I'm asking which code points, and possibly an example font. So, as fantasai said, such fonts will not work if we don't apply 'vert' to U code points, right?
3. Are U+201C/201D T?

[1] http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otspec/features_uz.htm


Regards,
Koji

----------
From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Eric Muller
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 12:18 AM
To: www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: [css3-writing-modes] The original issues of font-dependent glyph orientation

On 10/3/2011 5:31 PM, fantasai wrote: 
If I understand correctly, this means legacy fonts (which would be, all the fonts in existence today) would not be using most of their 'vert' glyphs, 

I'd say that most of the 'vert' transformations would be used, both counting the numbers of entries in a typical 'vert' feature, and counting the number of times they are applied in a document: small katakana, square katakana symbols, a few punctutations, and the brackets if we let SB go through 'vert', dominate that number.


but that going forward we will have a reliable, understandable system for vertical typesetting. If so, I believe this is the right approach for Unicode

Good.


. It does leave open the question of how typesetting systems are to deal with legacy fonts, which do not support the new feature

Looking at the current 'vert' lookups, the entries that are not for T characters are not doing more than rotating the glyphs; in other word, even if that feature existed today, it seems that the existing fonts would not use it.

Eric.
Received on Tuesday, 4 October 2011 23:43:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:45 GMT