[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Re: Unicode Font Maker

Thomas,
Are you suggesting that the font is a tremendous improvement because
the font does not have any ligature? This is a sincere questions, not
to belittle you. I would like to share my experience in this regards.
Although I'm neither a professional font developer nor expert in the
field, I do find a problem with fonts without ligature. Of course ,
this can be solve, but need some consideration.

Actually, I've done some work on this to the extend that all typical
ligature is replaced, and I would say the font I develop is good. The
font does have more alternatives then just lam alef sequence. I've
sent a screenshot of the font to Mete, and Gregg if I'm not mistaken.
The positive point about it is that software will be able to display
an individual glyph with different colors. Plus, this approach will
definately works under Linux without any problems. So, that is the
plus side.
On the other hand, with this type of font, we will need some serious
work when trying to justify a text /paragraph. Paul Nelson describe on
Microsoft page that IE 5.5 supposedly have 3 mode for arabic
justification: inter-word, tatweel and newspaper (if I'm not mistaken)
Anyway, basically here's how the 3 mode should work:
1. Inter word: inserting spaces between words. This is the most
typical type of justification for any script.
2. Tatweel : this is specific to arabic, and the most common method for arabic.
3. Newspaper : spaces inserted inter-word and some intra-word. I'm not
so sure if tatweel is used.

Anyway, that's the theory. When I try to use it (by using CSS), guess
what? The inter-word key does not work! It still insert tatweel here
and there. So, what is the problem? Just imagine a tatweel inserted
between lam and alef ! That is just an example, althgouh they might be
smart enough not to do that. Anyway, I can confirmed that tatweel will
be inserted , and we can't really control it. So, maybe not for lam
alef, but sequence like yeh reh will difinitely be effected. And is
does look wierd.

After I found this problem, I stop further improving the font. I hope
this can be solved, but not sure how. Of course, this is not a major
issue, bt I do not want to waste my time much on something that might
not work. Just want to share my experience  with people here. This is
one of the reason why I mentioned before that I really would like to
see people work seriously on Arabic justification problem.

Regards.

On 8/1/05, Thomas Milo <t dot milo at chello dot nl> wrote:
> Here is a tremendous improvement over Microsoft's "Arabic Typesetting" font.
> By simply omitting all ligatures (even al-laah is absent!), SIL managed to
> produce two fonts that avoid making a mockery of the Islamic calligraphic
> tradition, while offering basic legibility for the whole range of supported
> Unicode characters. Not bad at all.
> 
> The fonts do indeed look awfully familiar: one of them is in fact described
> as being "in a similar style as the Monotype naskh". Similar in style in
> this case is an artistic euphemism. The new naskh (called Scheherazade and
> for some reason spelled as in German -  Persian: شهرزاد Shahrzad) ) has the
> exact same tell-tale design blunders as the Monotype naskh, in the letters
> Sad and Tah: the top penstroke of the Sad extends under the base line in all
> positions (which in naskh is the case in non-final position only), the top
> penstroke of the Tah erroneously extends under the base line in middle
> position: here clearly some un-initiated employee mixed up Sad and Tah
> morphology, as the top penstroke of Tah never extends below the base line.
> Monotype in turn made these mistakes when copying the 1924 King Fuad naskh
> with only superficial knowledge of the subject matter (that this was in fact
> the case can be seen from additional tell-tale mistakes that Monotype failed
> to intercept when aorking from the Fuad naskh, and that, indeed, made their
> way into all Monotype successive clones including these latest ones).
> 
> The accumulated mistakes of the Fuad naskh and the Monotype naskh found
> their way into the SIL naskh, so these latest fonts stand firmly in the
> Arabic typographic tradition. But it's a free download, so only professional
> type designers can complain.
> 
> Together with the Gentium transcription font SIL succeeded in enabling
> scholars to prepare their publications in Unicode format, so that
> professional typesetters can ignore these public domain fonts without losing
> essential information.
> 
> t
> 
> 
> Connie Bobroff wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > You might like these new, free, unicode Arabic fonts.  They contain
> > the Persian characters as well.
> >
> >
> http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsi&item_id=ArabicFonts
> >
> > Windows users want to download the "Open Type" version and
> > Mac users need the "AAT".
> >
> >
> > -Connie
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >  ~  The ADABIYAT email list for Middle Eastern Literary Traditions   ~
> >  ~  Archives (http://www.listserv.emory.edu/archives/adabiyat.html)  ~
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Conni
> e Bobroff wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > You might like these new, free, unicode Arabic fonts.  They contain
> > the Persian characters as well.
> >
> >
> http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsi&item_id=ArabicFonts
> >
> > Windows users want to download the "Open Type" version and
> > Mac users need the "AAT".
> >
> >
> > -Connie
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >  ~  The ADABIYAT email list for Middle Eastern Literary Traditions   ~
> >  ~  Archives (http://www.listserv.emory.edu/archives/adabiyat.html)  ~
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Mete Kural wrote:
> >> I'm forwarding this email about font tools from the unicode list
> >> since it is relevant to the recent discussion:
> >>
> >> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
> >> From: John Hudson <tiro at tiro dot com>
> >> Date:  Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:55:31 -0700
> >>
> >> Adam Reisman wrote:
> >>
> >>> Can anyone recommend a program I can use to design unicode fonts?
> >>
> >> Professional tools:
> >> http://www.fontlab.com/Font-tools/FontLab-4.6/
> >> http://www.fontlab.com/Font-tools/AsiaFont-Studio/
> >> http://www.fontmaster.nl/english/
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheaper options:
> >> http://www.fontlab.com/Font-tools/TypeTool/
> >> http://www.high-logic.com/fcp.html
> >>
> >>
> >> Free tools:
> >> http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/
> >>
> >>
> >> There is also a new shareware tool available from
> >> http://www.cr8.netfirms.com/index10.html
> >> but I have not tried it.
> >>
> >>
> >> If you are interested in developing OpenType fonts with glyph
> >> substitution and
> >> positioning, you will also want to take a look at Microsoft's free
> >> VOLT tool: http://www.microsoft.com/typography/VOLT.mspx
> >>
> >>
> >> I recommend reading most of the developer links at the MS typography
> >> website http://www.microsoft.com/typography
> >> even if your target system is not Windows.
> >>
> >> John Hudson
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Tiro Typeworks        www.tiro.com
> >> Vancouver, BC        tiro at tiro dot com
> >>
> >> Currently reading:
> >> Between silk and cyanide, by Leo Mark
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Mete Kural
> >> Touchtone Corporation
> >> 714-755-2810
> >> --
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> General mailing list
> >> General at arabeyes dot org
> >> http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
> 
> _______________________________________________
> General mailing list
> General at arabeyes dot org
> http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>