As far as I know there are Unicode version of the font using same glyph.
Just the CDAC's website.
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Arthur Reutenauer <
arthur.reutena...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> > Guys! I have access to that font(DV-TTSurekh-Normal).
>
> It's not the one Mike used, he mentioned
Yes! People here still use ASCII hack font till Adobe Apps will natively
support Devanagari Unicode. Every place where digital Devanagari is to be
used, ASCII hack font are used. Unicode font are only for some tech-
enthusiasts and Indologist.
d
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Mike Maxwell wrote:
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Arthur Reutenauer <
arthur.reutena...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> > Guys! I have access to that font(DV-TTSurekh-Normal).
>
> It's not the one Mike used, he mentioned SD-TTSurekh. In fact, a
> Google search for DV-TTSurekh gives as first hit a link to download it,
On 9/25/2010 12:00 PM, Ujjwol Lamichhane wrote:
Guys! I have access to that font(DV-TTSurekh-Normal). As far as I know
it is said that font is made in 1996-97. And it in no way a Unicode
OpenType Font. It is an ASCII hack font for Devanagari. The Devanagari
glyph are draw in latin names. So, for
> Guys! I have access to that font(DV-TTSurekh-Normal).
It's not the one Mike used, he mentioned SD-TTSurekh. In fact, a
Google search for DV-TTSurekh gives as first hit a link to download it,
without any indication as to the legality of this.
But what you say probably applies to SD-TTSurekh
Guys! I have access to that font(DV-TTSurekh-Normal). As far as I know it is
said that font is made in 1996-97. And it in no way a Unicode OpenType Font.
It is an ASCII hack font for Devanagari. The Devanagari glyph are draw in
latin names. So, for example when you type a you will get क as glyph of
> Now that you mention it, it might be--I didn't pay attention to the date
> below. I think the Unicode Devanagari block is pretty old, but it might
> not be that old.
Of course it's older, it was already in Unicode 1.1 in 1993 (the
version of Unicode that was unified with ISO 10646) -- and
On 9/24/2010 11:37 AM, Ujjwol Lamichhane wrote:
Maxwell, Sorry! quite out of topic, is that Saṃskṛtā Devanāgarī font a
ASCII hack font or Unicode based font ?
Now that you mention it, it might be--I didn't pay attention to the date
below. I think the Unicode Devanagari block is pretty old, b
Maxwell, Sorry! quite out of topic, is that Saṃskṛtā Devanāgarī font a
ASCII hack font or Unicode based font ?
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 7:09 PM, maxwell wrote:
> I used XeLaTeX to create a PDF. One of the fonts (SD-TTSurekh) didn't get
> embedded. Presumably this is because its license doesn't
font forge: font information, OS/2 table
- Mike "Pomax" Kamermans
nihongoresources.com
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
10 matches
Mail list logo
