On 2019-01-10 11:27 PM, wjgo_10...@btinternet.com wrote:
Yesterday I wrote as follows.
I suggest that a solution to the problem would be to encode a
COMBINING ITALICIZER character, such that it only applies to the
character that it immediately follows. So, for example, to make the
word apricot become displayed in italics one would use seven
COMBINING ITALICIZER characters, one after each letter of the word
apricot.
I have now made a test font. I used a Private Use Area code point and
a visible glyph for this test. It works well.
https://forum.high-logic.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=7831
Would it be a good idea to encode such a character into Unicode? The
first step would be to persuade the "powers that be" that italics are
needed. That seems presently unlikely. There's an entrenched mindset
which seems to derive from the fact that pre-existing character sets
were based on mechanical typewriting technology and were limited by
the maximum number of glyphs in primitive computer fonts.
The first step would be to persuade the "powers that be" that italics
are needed. That seems presently unlikely. There's an entrenched
mindset which seems to derive from the fact that pre-existing character
sets were based on mechanical typewriting technology and were further
limited by the maximum number of glyphs in primitive computer fonts.
The second step would be to persuade Unicode to encode a new character
rather than simply using an existing variation selector character to do
the job.
