News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Google Noto Fonts. Parent comment

Re:Google Noto Fonts by grrowl on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @02:33AM (#8040832)
Good pick, but I also see the value in preservation — maybe 500 years from now, the Noto fonts will be the best or only representation of many dead or forgotten scripts and languages.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google Noto Fonts by ubernostrum on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @11:54AM (#8042685)
Although they are non-prescriptive, the Unicode Osmanya table:

http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10480.pdf

already contains reference glyphs. If you want to preserve scripts, preserve Unicode tables instead of making fonts.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google Noto Fonts by bcoates on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @12:18PM (#8042828)
There are many more glyphs than there are codepoints -- a font contains a ton of information that would be needed to reproduce a script that is not present in unicode tables.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google Noto Fonts by acdha on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @09:38PM (#8045576)
This is particularly true for non-European languages – ligatures are a minor feature for most of the languages using latin-1 but there are quite a few which depend on complex, multi-letter combinations which are required for text to be comprehensible:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_text_layout

[ Parent | on HN ]