You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 7, 2023. It is now read-only.
It’s quite a typical situation. Font producers find something they need to represent and just go ahead and make their fonts to show it, without considering the impact on character identities and text interchange. The industry needs to have a more systematic solution.
This issue is meant to be an invite to some general discussions.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
(Open to suggestions about a more informative title.)
I reported this following issue to the Noto project earlier:
https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts/issues/1761
GUNJALA GONDI VIRAMA behaves inconsistently with the Unicode Standard’s current definition
It’s quite a typical situation. Font producers find something they need to represent and just go ahead and make their fonts to show it, without considering the impact on character identities and text interchange. The industry needs to have a more systematic solution.
This issue is meant to be an invite to some general discussions.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: