Re: [ft-devel] problems with synthetic cmaps

[Alexei Podtelezhnikov]

On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>>> (1) Don't synthesize a Unicode cmap map for symbol OpenType fonts
>>>>     (i.e., fonts having a (3,0) cmap).
>>>>
>>>> (2) Discard a synthesized Unicode cmap if the number of mappings
>>>>     is much lower than the mappings in another cmap of the font.
>>
>> Since Wingdings and Webdings are in Unicode 7.0, any objection to
>>
>> (3) Improve synthetic Unicode map by adding the missing PostScript
>>     names for the fonts in question.
>
> Basically, I don't object.  However, this solution doesn't scale IMHO.
> Symbol fonts with a (3,0) can contain arbitrary glyphs that are mapped
> to 0xF000-0xF0FF – it's not standardized in general.  In other words,
> we can provide proper tables for `wingding', but this solution won't
> work for other symbol fonts.

Do you think there are many symbol fonts with custom PostScriot names
to confuse FreeType? Perhaps Hin-Tak can let us know if there are
fonts with unrecognizable PostScript names.