Joined: Oct. 2006
||Posted: Mar. 14 2008,01:49
UTF-8 is also 8-bit.
One 8-bit font, compared to N unicode fonts seems to be more in keeping with the DSL style.
What are the reasons for making a new charset, instead of using a subset of the glyphs in UTF-8?
We could just as easily have one single UTF-8 font - rather than "N unicode fonts":
Last year, I tried a shareware Unicode font that includes all the glyphs from all major languages; it worked across all webpages (in Firefox) -- Russian, Japanese, Chinese, Tamil, Arabic...
The name of the font is Code2000.
The webpage is here:
Quote from website:
This is a great attitude!
|The Code2000 download doesn’t degrade or expire and there are no annoying pop-up screens. This has been left open-ended intentionally. In some cases, members of minority script user communites — those who need a font like Code2000 the most — can least afford it. Clearly, if registering the font means your family doesn’t get enough food on the table, even for one meal, then it is not reasonable to register the font.|
I think this is a good idea for making a font -- even if we don't intend to make a full/complete font; only a smaller/essential one.
Other than that, I agree with all your points.
i.e. It should be easy to use; it should fit in a small footprint; etc...
Please by all means continue on this project!!
(I cannot help you though -- I don't know programming at all.)