On 09/23/2013 01:03 PM, Koji Ishii wrote: > Thank you for the feedback. > > - The "(proportional-width)" removed. > - The term "OpenType implementation" changed. > - The "sophisticated" removed. > >> I suggest that we simply omit this example. > > I think we once resolved to add your algorithm as an example, > so it's easier to edit than remove. Hope this edits resolve > all your feedback. I've reviewed these edits, and agree that this should resolve the issue around the incorrect assumptions in the previous wording John, as you review the text, please keep in mind that the UA is not required to use width variants if the TCY fits within 1em without their use. Your wording here: > This example is inconsistent with the requirement to use > width variants when they are available makes me think you are ignoring this fact. ~fantasaiReceived on Monday, 23 September 2013 23:59:51 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:32 UTC