- From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 00:44:55 +0200
- To: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <444EA667.9050309@students.cs.uu.nl>
David Woolley schreef: >> There is nothing that prevents you from taking all the characters that=20 >> you need from a font file, and put a subset into a new one, except maybe=20 >> that there aren=E2=80=99t any (free or well-known or easy-to-use) tools=20 >> available to do that right now. >> > > The result would have a bogus encoding, and one of the arguments for > proper use of text rather than image is that the text should be machine > processable and therefore should have the declared encoding for the > web page. I of course never meant to imply it be used like that, that makes absolutely no sense. Don’t TTF fonts provide a mapping of code points to glyphs? Surely they do? How else would they cope with gaps in their character support (e.g. only latin-1 and symbols)? Store an empty glyph placeholder there? That seems awfully primitive to me. Anyways, if that is the means, there is no reason why a tool couldn’t replace the unused glyphs with an empty placeholder to reduce the size. ~Grauw -- Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.
Received on Tuesday, 25 April 2006 22:45:15 UTC