Re: Reservations about <mchar>

"William F. Hammond" wrote:
> In particular, the use of empties is not a substitute for
> "mchar", which is still needed as new symbols are coined.

The <mchar> tag simply provides a mapping to existing
characters (or Unicode points). It doesn't cater for new 
symbols. I guess you are looking for <mglyph>. This one is
going to be a really useful tag for new symbols, if it is used
correctly, and if font designers play by the rules (otherwise
we may run into problems like with TeX fonts which have
different encoding indices depending on the platform).

> I don't think that it is a good idea to let design be held up with
> these particular fears about cpu load.  (Just think about how this
> cpu issue would have been assessed in 1990.)

There is more to this than just CPU. Deprecating entities means
they are going to be obsoleted/removed in the next versions.
So some of us want to understand the issues and appreciate
the explanations of the thoughts that are going on in the WG.

Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2000 19:10:51 UTC