Re: Tech: Unicode (was...)

Thanks for information. I begin to see the whole thing
a little clearer by now. I hope that in a near future
all fonts provided on computers will be full-Unicode,
so there wouldn't be any problems left (but I'm still
expecting the keyboard to change automatically
according to the alphabet used, which would be quite
possible if, instead of being mechanical, it were
conceived as a tactile screen. Oh no ! I told this
great idea on the Web, and hence lost all the
royalties I could have got if I had patented it).

--- Garth Wallace <gwalla@...> wrote:
[...]

> The font uses a subset. Unicode 2.1 has *way* more
> than just Latin,
> Cyrillic, Arabic, Hebrew, and Symbol. CJKV was in
> from the beginning, AIUI.
>
> > and
> > that's about all. So I suppose I should load all
> > range-fonts one by one (how many are they ?), and
> > before doing an Insert / Special character,
> changing
> > to the font I would like to use.
>
> Yeah, but chances are you won't be changing ranges
> that often in a document.
Except in case you're interested in linguistics...

[...]
>
> A font in an old release will simply be missing some
> characters. In
> other words, they'll cover smaller ranges.
Yes, but I meant that it's more difficult to maintain
a dozen fonts at the same level than just a single
one.



=====
Philippe Caquant

"High thoughts must have high language." (Aristophanes, Frogs)


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover

Replies