Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On 2/5/06, Adam Lindsay wrote:
Hans Hagen wrote:
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
Hello,
The fact that all Polish fonts (lm, iwona, kurier, antt) now ship with el-* files makes me wonder: is there time to do the next step and finish the second encoding with symbols?
indeed Oop. Sorry, I hadn't been watching that. I've suggested texnansi as a starting point, at least within ConTeXt. What symbols do people want that *aren't* within texnansi?
1. Would Caron & similar uppercase accents make sense? I doubt that many accents are needed in addition to what is already present in the other encoding anyway, but something like that could be used if there is no Ccaron present in the font for example:
\definecharacter Ccaron {\buildtextaccent\textCaron C} instead of \definecharacter Ccaron {\buildtextaccent\textcaron C}
In well-designed fonts (including all Polish fonts such as lm, antykwa, iwona, ...) the lowercase and the uppercase variant of the accent differ. (Try to write \Scaron\Ccaron in texnansi encoding for example to see the difference).
Good point... except that there are *no* accents available in eurolett, anyway. It *should* have all of the accented uppercase characters you need (within roman ;). The whole theory is to do away with building text accents. But what does Hans want? Should lc and uc accents be available to create `weird' combinations?
Of course some care has to be taken, so that it will also work for fonts without those additional accents for uppercase characters (using \iffontchar perhaps?).
Indeed. I do want to avoid a strong dependency on the specific glyphs that appear in the font. That moves the encoding mess to *within* ConTeXt, which is not pretty, either.
2. perhaps some currency symbols missing in texnansi I would suggest to add Euro, but with some special care of course. Perhaps some users still prefer to use the regular (geometrical) symbol rather than the one taken from I-forgot-which-font (the default behaviour when \texteuro is used).
Any other currency on this list worth supporting? http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U20A0.pdf Perhaps dong, lira, Won ...
sounds like ts1-like stuff.
3. Perhaps a short glimpse into: http://source.contextgarden.net/ts1-lm.enc http://www.cstug.cz/aktivity/2005/lm-at11e.pdf http://www.janusz.nowacki.strefa.pl/pliki/AntykwaTorunska-doc-en-2_03.pdf if you notice anything worth supporting.
"married" might be useful for geneaology, I guess that the leaf is there for the same purpose. No idea why anyone would want to use the musical note (ugly in lm and probably hardly present in any other font).
They're there because of ts1, which is *mostly* unhelpful here. I would have thought glyph coverage from places like Adobe, Storm, and Emigre (for example) might be a better guide.
4. numero sign, ordfeminine, ordmasculine, copyleft ;), I don't know
well, some of those are in standard practice, at least. ;)
if anybody needs fractions, permyriad, ... one/two/...superior (present in some regimes) are pretty pointless in TeX where you can use \high{} I guess. Perhaps there should be two different glyphs for "tilde" and "asciitilde" (not sure about the last one.)
Yeah, I'm trying to be driven by *requirements* instead of "technical capability" (i.e., what already exists in a family of fairly peculiar fonts). I know those are around, but I don't hear a lot of calls for them since ConTeXt moved to EC as a default encoding. adam -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Adam T. Lindsay, Computing Dept. atl@comp.lancs.ac.uk Lancaster University, InfoLab21 +44(0)1524/510.514 Lancaster, LA1 4WA, UK Fax:+44(0)1524/510.492 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-