On 12-07-31 11:34, Jonathan Kew wrote: > ...of misinformation, I'm afraid. Indeed.
Keith J. Schultz <keithjschu...@web.de> wrote: >> Let us take ATSUI. Why has Apple abandon it? Well, I do not believe >> there are are any native ATT-fonts in the MacOS X any more. Most complex-script fonts (Arabic, Indic etc.) that ship with Mac OS X are AAT, and continue to be. In fact, Apple is actively developing AAT: Mac OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion has support for a new "kerx" table which allows for horizontal and vertical class-based kerning, much akin to the OpenType Layout GPOS table. AAT is also actively supported on iOS, especially for performance issues (the layout of AAT complex-script fonts is approx. 3x faster than of OTL fonts with comparable functionality). >> >> Is Core Text a alternative? Not, actually. > > Yes, actually. Core Text is the modern, supported replacement for > ATSUI functionality. AAT is Apple's layout technology. ATSUI and CoreText are different APIs. Similarly, OpenType Layout is another technology. Analogically, HarfBuzz and Pango are two different APIs for that. > Core Text doesn't have "support for ATSUI" in the sense of providing a > set of ATSUI-clone APIs to applications, but it most certainly does > have support for AAT fonts, which is the relevant issue here. True. One aspect of AAT that CoreText may have dropped (but ATSUI still has) is TrueType variations (fvar/gvar table) -- though I'm not entirely certain of it. But, as mentioned above, AAT is being actively developed, contrary to what you may believe. Regards, Adam -- May success attend your efforts, -- Adam Twardoch (Remove "list." from e-mail address to contact me directly.) -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
