[MPEG-OTSPEC] 回复: [EXTERNAL] Re: Shaping behavior standardization: multi-engine or "Super USE"?

[Renzhi Li]

It looks like that we could start adding a new set of script tags to route any existing scripts (like Latin) to USE. Or simply route all ISO 15924 script tags (capitalized) to USE? If we had that we could mark all the existing shaping engines as legacy, and their standardization process could be deprioritized.

I really hope that, USE will eventually become a truly universal engine that is driven by some sort of extended UCD data and could process every script of every language.

Yours,
Renzhi
________________________________
发件人: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at> 代表 John Hudson <john at tiro.ca>
发送时间: 2020年8月21日 12:28
收件人: mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
主题: [EXTERNAL] Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Shaping behavior standardization: multi-engine or "Super USE"?

On 21082020 12:13 pm, Renzhi Li wrote:
> Therefore, for the shaping behavior standardization, should we
> standardize all the existing engines (focus on the "status quo"), or
> work on USE extension to use one single engine for every script?

Both.

We do need to ensure that the existing engines provide consistent
results for existing fonts built to those specs, even if we also provide
mechanisms to pass scripts to USE instead.

The USE layout model is both general and particular: it requires fonts
for scripts with complex shaping requirements for correct text display
to be made in a very particular ways, which are not compatible with the
methods used in fonts for existing shaping engines. So passing any
script that currently goes to a dedicated engine through USE is going to
require new script tags (or another special convention, e.g. a generic
script tag. Even simple scripts might involve some different methods
when being passed through USE, and would need to be considered cautiously.

[With regard to the latter, there was recently a discussion on the Noto
repo regarding whether scripts with very simple layout requirements
should be passed to USE*. My inclination is yes, they should, and that
any newly supported script should be passed through USE regardless of
the simplicity or complexity of shaping requirements. It would be
helpful to know the position of the USE implementers on this.]

JH


* https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fgooglefonts%2Fnoto-fonts%2Fissues%2F576&data=02%7C01%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C522f0caf09c44086565608d846085d90%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C0%7C0%7C637336349042290911&sdata=D%2BHEgBW34WH7srIxNx4Z2kDaTAhicPxwI1qAhTfNJFg%3D&reserved=0


--

John Hudson
Tiro Typeworks Ltd    https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiro.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C522f0caf09c44086565608d846085d90%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C0%7C0%7C637336349042908210&sdata=N6PVcUI5H4BlW%2BWyZ0kZKKyv9HqurjtyzZJDU71aK4s%3D&reserved=0
Salish Sea, BC        tiro at tiro.com

NOTE: In the interests of productivity, I am currently
dealing with email on only two days per week, usually
Monday and Thursday unless this schedule is disrupted
by travel. If you need to contact me urgently, please
use some other method of communication. Thank you.

_______________________________________________
mpeg-otspec mailing list
mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.aau.at%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmpeg-otspec&data=02%7C01%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C522f0caf09c44086565608d846085d90%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C0%7C0%7C637336349042908210&sdata=P25aS%2FdwAwWUC7QcYTRErfBSofoFGiU5gMnDPwysGL8%3D&reserved=0
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20200821/e76813f6/attachment.html>