[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[KNAPPEN@VKPMZD.kph.Uni-Mainz.DE: Re: psnfss and lw35nfss]
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 13:30:13 +0100
Subject: Re: psnfss and lw35nfss
To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
> > do people think its vital to get it done?
> I think, having a dotless j is vital. It has been in the standadr TeX glyph
> set for 15 years, and I need it from time to time to typeset some text in
Well the UNICODE people have decided there is no such character as `dotlessj'
in any language. The closest are `dotlessjdash' and `dotlessjinverteddash'.
The fact that it has been in CM fonts is about as significant
as that the `currency' symbol has been in Adobe fonts.
It's only use is as a base for making composites/accented characters.
And these - like jcircumflex - should be in the font as glyphs
in their own right (as they are in WGL4 fonts or `Latin' fonts like
Lucida Bright Latin, Lucida Sans Latin and Lucida Sans Typewriter Latin).
Note that in distinction, dotlessi is in UNICODE - not because it can
be used as the base for various accented characters - but because it
is a glyph in its own right in Turkish. Whereas no language uses
dotlessj. Correct me (and the ISO 10646 and UNICODE folks) if I am