Hi, At Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:01:26 +1100, Chanop Silpa-Anan wrote:
> tis620-0 is the offical one. please patch the code I'll try the mlterm > soon. I think it is the same as tis620.2533-1, just the naming that is > different. Thank you very much for your effort. However, I found that tis620-0 font is slightly different from tis620.xxxx-x fonts. Combining characters in tis620-0 fonts have negative expand (i.e., glyphs are written leftward from the specified location) while all characters in tis620.xxxx-x fonts are exactly fixed-width. Can we rely on the structures of fonts? --- Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.debian.or.jp/~kubota/ "Introduction to I18N" http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/intro-i18n/
