Double mapping is bad
Ray Larabie
Posts: 1,436
I know it's considered bad to assign two Unicode values one glyph, but I can't remember why. Someone recently suggested to me that it would be a good idea in the case of all-caps fonts, to double map the uppercase as to eliminate the superfluous lowercase set. It sounds like a disaster, but I couldn't explain specifically why it's so bad. I recall a discussion about this on another type design forum but I can't recall the details. It's bad, right?
Tagged:
0
Comments
-
What about the duplicate Greek and math glyphs?
0 -
I know it's considered bad to assign two Unicode values one glyph
It isn't. There are plenty of good candidates for double-mapped encodings. Adobe tends to avoid them because they want to have an unambiguous mapping from GID to Unicode for the sake of Acrobat, but even they accept double-encodings in some circumstances (e.g. legacy isolated presentation form mappings in Adobe Arabic).
Now, that said, the specific case of mapping a single glyph to both upper- and lowercase characters might be more susceptible to problems than other kinds of double mapping if software is making any assumptions about case mapping based on glyph names. That shouldn't be the case, but it's remarkable how assumptions about glyph names linger.
3
Categories
- All Categories
- 43 Introductions
- 3.7K Typeface Design
- 803 Font Technology
- 1K Technique and Theory
- 622 Type Business
- 444 Type Design Critiques
- 542 Type Design Software
- 30 Punchcutting
- 136 Lettering and Calligraphy
- 83 Technique and Theory
- 53 Lettering Critiques
- 485 Typography
- 303 History of Typography
- 114 Education
- 68 Resources
- 499 Announcements
- 80 Events
- 105 Job Postings
- 148 Type Releases
- 165 Miscellaneous News
- 270 About TypeDrawers
- 53 TypeDrawers Announcements
- 116 Suggestions and Bug Reports