Re: Encodings, Non-T1 symbols, and bitmapped fonts...

[Joachim Schrod <schrod@iti.informatik.th-darmstadt.de>]

Alan wrote:
> 
> Mellisa said:
> 
> >One often hears the phrase `despite all of its problems' about
> >T1 encoding; other than not having misc. symbols (which aren't
> >_letters_ anyway) *what* are the problems?
> 
> Lots of little things...  almost no fonts have a <perthousandzero>
> glyph; T1 has a slot for the Sami <ng> and <Ng> glyphs but not (so I
> am told) the other Sami glyphs; the Turkish letter \.\i doesn't quite
> come out as expected in small caps; the inclusion of <section> but not
> <paragraph>;

I would even phrase it more radically: There _are_ misc symbols in
T1. They should all be thrown out and replaced by letters of
languages not covered yet. I.e., to get more easy support for more
languages.

But then, this opinion was already shared by too few persons when we
discussed T1. :-( (I wasn't the person who brought it up originally,
btw.)

(As an aside, I don't think of `glyphs' when I look at T1. -- That's
an encoding, not a font...)

	Joachim

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Joachim Schrod			Email: schrod@iti.informatik.th-darmstadt.de
Computer Science Department
Technical University of Darmstadt, Germany