Re: UAX#50 conformance: Is it possible to update existing fonts without causing damage to existing non-CSS applications?

Pardon guys, but why is this discussed on the www-archive list?

On 2019-12-25 12:18, MURATA Makoto wrote:
> Yamamoto-san,
> 
> Thanks for your hard work.  You investigated glyph!
> 
> Category A is problematic.  We have to take some action.
> U+2016 ‖
> U+2702 ✂
> 
> Category E is also problematic. We have to take some action at least for U+3030.
> U+3030 〰
> U+ff01 ！
> U+ff1b ；
> U+ff1f ？
> 
> Categories B and C: If I am not missing anything, no characters are in these categories.
> 
> Category D has several characters and is debatable.   I would like to ask font vendors in CITPC .
> 
> 2019年12月25日(水) 15:52 Taro Yamamoto <tyamamot@adobe.com <mailto:tyamamot@adobe.com>>:
> 
>     Dear all,____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     Sorry, I updated the file again.____
> 
>     Though I wrote the following, I was wrong. Murata-san’s original file was correct. 😉
> 
>     ____
> 
>       * By the way, Murata-san’s original list included only 63 of 132 entries classified into the ‘D’ category of possible incompatibility issues. Also, his original list included only one of four existing ‘vert’ entries that can be classified as ‘E’. All the 132 entries categorized as ‘D’, as well as the four entries categorized as ‘E’ are listed below.____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     But I found that his file contained 159 duplicate entries, of which four are classified in the ‘D’ category of possible incompatibility with UAX #50. These duplicates seem to be needed, because one of the is for JIS X 0201 and the other for JIS X 0213?____
> 
>     __
> 
> Yes, I used this mapping table.
> 
> http://x0213.org/codetable/jisx0213-2004-8bit-std.txt
> 
> It is not official, but appears to be well maintained.
> I forwarded Yamamoto-san's mail to www-archive.
> 
> Regards,
> Makoto
> 
>     __
> 
>     --Taro____
> 
>     ____
> 
>     *送信元**: *Makoto MURATA <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp <mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>>
>     *日付**: *2019年12月24日火曜日11:54
>     *宛先**: *Yamamoto Taro <tyamamot@adobe.com <mailto:tyamamot@adobe.com>>, fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net <mailto:fantasai@inkedblade.net>>, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net <mailto:florian@rivoal.net>>, Nat McCully <nmccully@adobe.com <mailto:nmccully@adobe.com>>
>     *Cc: *Makoto MURATA <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp <mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>>, "www-archive@w3.org <mailto:www-archive@w3.org>" <www-archive@w3.org <mailto:www-archive@w3.org>>
>     *件名**: *Re: UAX#50 conformance: Is it possible to update existing fonts without causing damage to existing non-CSS applications?____
> 
>     ____
> 
>     With Yamamoto-san's help, I created a CSV file containing a tuple containing:
> 
>     - Unicode code point
>     - Unicode character
>     - CID (AJ1)
>     - cmap (UniJIS2004-UTF32-H or UniJISX02132004-UTF32-H)
>     - vert (AJ1 template)
>     - UAX#50 Tr/Tu/R/U
>     - draft SVO
> 
>     It is available at:
> 
>     https://1drv.ms/u/s!An5Z79wj5AZBgrkx0ohHD0zDhqCxxQ?e=ufWyFu <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F1drv.ms%2Fu%2Fs!An5Z79wj5AZBgrkx0ohHD0zDhqCxxQ%3Fe%3DufWyFu&data=02%7C01%7Ctyamamot%40adobe.com%7C2c6cb52499ed4fc327a808d7881c9394%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637127528627254575&sdata=BLJKp3zcT0RpuijkBt%2F7phGuNYkKFwqQndNu8Zxn3SA%3D&reserved=0>____
> 
>      1. Four Tr or Tu characters lack vert.  U+3030 〰is particularly problematic.  Unlike the Adobe template, MS Mincho specifies the vert feature for this character.____
>      2. Many R characters have the vert feature, and is thus cannot be displayed as specified in the Unicode code chart.  U+2016 ‖is a well-known example.  MS Mincho does NOT specify the vert feature for this character, though.____
>      3. Many SVO=R characters lack the vert feature.____
> 
>     Regards,____
> 
>     Makoto____
> 
>     ____
> 
>     2019年12月17日(火) 16:48 Taro Yamamoto <tyamamot@adobe.com <mailto:tyamamot@adobe.com>>:____
> 
>         Murata-san,____
> 
>         ____
> 
>           * They are caused by cmap resources dedicated to vertical writing.  In other words, for some character, vertical-writing cmap resources are used rather than vert.  Such characters include:____
> 
>           *    . . .____
>           * I used below cmap columns in cid2code.txt.____
> 
>           *   . . .____
> 
> 
>         # o Column 27: Character codes for the "UniJISX02132004-UTF32-H" and
>         #   "UniJISX02132004-UTF32-V" CMaps (Unicode 13.0 UTF-32 encoding,
>         #   proportional Latin characters, some proportional JIS X 0208:1997
>         #   characters, JIS X 0213:2004 prototypical glyphs as the default).____
> 
>         ____
> 
>         It seems that you referenced the CMap files intended for use in the vertical writing mode in the PostScript imaging model supporting the CIDFont format, in which there is no other method to select vertical glyph shapes, other than specifying a vertical font that can be referenced by using a CMap file whose name has the ‘-V’ suffix. Such CMap files partly and semantically similarly related to the ‘cmap’ table and ‘vert’ feature that we are discussing in the context of the OpenType font format, but they are separate things. Because of the existence of the ‘vert’ feature, an OpenType font does not need to have the V version of a ‘cmap’ table, as far as I understand.____
> 
>         ____
> 
>         Regards,____
> 
>         ____
> 
>         --Taro____
> 
>         ____
> 
> 
>     ____
> 
>     ____
> 
>     -- ____
> 
>     Regards,____
> 
>     Makoto____
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Makoto

Received on Wednesday, 25 December 2019 13:55:22 UTC