The SignWriting Fonts Test Page and Unicode 8 next year

[Stephen E Slevinski Jr]

On 9/7/14, 7:50 AM, Jonathan y Yolaine wrote:
> Have you considered making a font with only the fills for each 
> basegroup, then using CSS to do the rotation and miroring? Because 
> you'll need CSS to do the symbol placement and sign layout anyways.  
> The font would be about 12 to 13 times smaller.  Do you see any 
> drawbacks doing it this way?
>
Hi Jonathan,

This might be helpful in some cases, such as the hands and the arrows, 
but it would add a lot of complication.  The exceptions would have to be 
identified and handled correctly.

Specifically, rotation 1 and rotation 2 do not match up perfectly on the 
45 degree rotation.  From rotation 1, we could derive rotations 3, 5, 7, 
9, 11, 13, and 15.  From rotation 2, we could derive rotations 4, 6, 8, 
10, 12, 14, and 16.  This is a relic of the symbol set from SignWriter 
Dos and Valerie's original PNG version of the ISWA 2010.

I do not think it would be worth the efforts, but I would be happy to be 
wrong.  Having a much smaller font would be a good thing.

Regards,
-Steve

________________________________________________


SIGNWRITING LIST INFORMATION

Valerie Sutton
SignWriting List moderator
sutton at signwriting.org

Post Messages to the SignWriting List:
sw-l at listserv.valenciacollege.edu

SignWriting List Archives & Home Page
http://www.signwriting.org/forums/swlist

Join, Leave or Change How You Receive SW List Messages
http://listserv.valenciacollege.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SW-L&A=1