| ... | @@ -13,4 +13,5 @@ |
... | @@ -13,4 +13,5 @@ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Do we have duplicate glyphs for style vs mathvariant (for example alphabets from STIX-Bold.otf and the corresponding characters from the Mathematical Alpha Num block of STIX-Regular.otf)? If so, is it ok not to repeat them in the Web fonts splitting?
|
|
* Do we have duplicate glyphs for style vs mathvariant (for example alphabets from STIX-Bold.otf and the corresponding characters from the Mathematical Alpha Num block of STIX-Regular.otf)? If so, is it ok not to repeat them in the Web fonts splitting?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Splitting the fonts will require some changes like dropping the Open Type Math table, adding space characters for monospace, moving non-Unicode glyphs to the Plane0 PUA etc In general the splitting is designed for MathJax's purpose and may not work well in browsers (these could just use WOFF packaging of the STIX-Word, without further modifications). |
|
* Splitting the fonts will require some changes like dropping the Open Type Math table, adding space characters for monospace, moving non-Unicode glyphs to the Plane0 PUA etc In general the splitting is designed for MathJax's purpose and may not work well in browsers (these could just use WOFF packaging of the STIX-Word, without further modifications).
|
|
\ No newline at end of file |
|
> Peter: @Fred Could you specify "may not work well in browsers"? What functionality will be lost, which loss can be worked around (without MathJax) etc. |
|
|
|
\ No newline at end of file |
