In the years I've been using Macs, I've become rather familiar with the 
glyphs available in the older, pre-OpenType fonts. For instance, I know ... 
or at least I thought I knew ... that the 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 fractions are not 
included in most fonts. Note that by "most fonts" I refer to older, 
non-Unicode fonts, like the Type 1 and older TrueTypes we have had for years.

In the following discussions, be aware that I have no dfonts installed other 
than LucidaGrande, LastResort, and Keyboard. Any reference to a common font 
like Verdana or Times New Roman is a TrueType shipped during OS9 days.

PART 1	================================================================== 
Someone sent me a Windows Word doc with a 1/4 fraction character created with 
TrueType Times New Roman. It shows up fine in Mac Word 2004, and remains 1/4 
no matter what font I change it to (other than, say, Symbol or Zapf 
Dingbats). This includes even Chicago and Geneva. This is not a 1-slash-4 
combination.

How is it that I can see it as 1/4 in a font that doesn't have that glyhp?


PART 2 ================================================================== I 
was on a Web site using Safari and saw a 1/2 fraction on the screen in 
Verdana font.

- In Safari, a view source shows the fraction. The font in the source window 
is the old, OS9-era Monaco.

- If I paste the text into Illustrator CS or Word 2004, it shows the 
fraction.  I can change the font to anything, even an old Type 1, and they 
still show the fraction. Illustrator's Glyph palette shows fractions for old 
T1s as well.

So, again, how is it that it works in so many situations, and how is it that 
even Illustrator's Glyph palette includes it?

Tim Murray wrote:

> In the years I've been using Macs, I've become rather familiar with the 
> glyphs available in the older, pre-OpenType fonts. For instance, I know ... 
> or at least I thought I knew ... that the 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 fractions are not 
> included in most fonts. Note that by "most fonts" I refer to older, 
> non-Unicode fonts, like the Type 1 and older TrueTypes we have had for years.

I think that this is the source of your confusion.  "Most fonts" have, 
in fact, always included the indicated fractions, ½, ¼, and ¾.  Even the 
one you're using to view this message.

This applies to commercial and system-supplied text fonts.  Not 
necessarily to display fonts or various slap-dash free fonts.

  - Character

On Thu, 19 May 2005 16:21:21 -0400, Character wrote:
> I think that this is the source of your confusion.  "Most fonts" have, 
> in fact, always included the indicated fractions, , , and .  Even the 
> one you're using to view this message.

But I'm pretty sure it's not true for fractions for many of the standard Type 
1s like Times, Helvetica, Courier, and so on.

Tim Murray wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2005 16:21:21 -0400, Character wrote:
> 
>>I think that this is the source of your confusion.  "Most fonts" have, >>in fact, always included the indicated fractions, ½, ¼, and ¾.  Even the 
>>one you're using to view this message.
> 
> 
> But I'm pretty sure it's not true for fractions for many of the standard Type 
> 1s like Times, Helvetica, Courier, and so on. 

It's particularly true for those you named. They each have a full 
complement of almost 256 glyphs.  (Although I'm not as positive about 
Apple's version of Courier)

   - Character

Perhaps the fonts included the fractions but Mac just made it impossible (or
at least unreasonably difficult) to get at them?

-- 
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
Word MVP FAQ site: http://word.mvps.org
Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.

"Tim Murray"  wrote in message
news:0001HW.BEB273C70018C2CDF04B85B0@msnews.microsoft.com...
> On Thu, 19 May 2005 16:21:21 -0400, Character wrote:
> > I think that this is the source of your confusion.  "Most fonts" have,
> > in fact, always included the indicated fractions, , , and .  Even the
> > one you're using to view this message.
>
> But I'm pretty sure it's not true for fractions for many of the standard
Type
> 1s like Times, Helvetica, Courier, and so on.
>

On Thu, 19 May 2005 17:33:58 -0400, Character wrote:
>> But I'm pretty sure it's not true for fractions for many of the standard 
>> Type 
>> 1s like Times, Helvetica, Courier, and so on. 
> 
> It's particularly true for those you named. They each have a full 
> complement of almost 256 glyphs.  (Although I'm not as positive about 
> Apple's version of Courier)

I have the standard character set keycap chart from Adobe for their usual 
Type 1 library, and there are no fractions. Further, I have binders-full of 
printouts from FontBook -- some new, some yellowing with age -- and there are 
no fractions.

Answer me this: What is the keystroke to get 1/2 from Adobe's Type 1 Times? 
Not Adobe's new OpenType or Monotype's Times New Roman, but Adobe's Type 1?

Tim Murray wrote:

> On Thu, 19 May 2005 17:33:58 -0400, Character wrote:
> 
>>>But I'm pretty sure it's not true for fractions for many of the standard 
>>>Type 
>>>1s like Times, Helvetica, Courier, and so on. 
>>
>>It's particularly true for those you named. They each have a full 
>>complement of almost 256 glyphs.  (Although I'm not as positive about 
>>Apple's version of Courier)
> 
> 
> I have the standard character set keycap chart from Adobe for their usual 
> Type 1 library, and there are no fractions. Further, I have binders-full of 
> printouts from FontBook -- some new, some yellowing with age -- and there are 
> no fractions.
> 
> Answer me this: What is the keystroke to get 1/2 from Adobe's Type 1 Times? 
> Not Adobe's new OpenType or Monotype's Times New Roman, but Adobe's Type 1?

Do you have any of the fonts themselves? And if so, what happens if you 
open them in Fontlab or Fontographer or some other program that lets you 
see the entire font?   I'm coming from the Adobe fonts of that time 
period for the PC - I find it highly unlikely that the Mac versions 
would have different character sets (except for things like the Apple logo)

- Character

On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:13:35 -0400, Character wrote:
> Do you have any of the fonts themselves? And if so, what happens if you 
> open them in Fontlab or Fontographer or some other program that lets you 
> see the entire font?   I'm coming from the Adobe fonts of that time 
> period for the PC - I find it highly unlikely that the Mac versions 
> would have different character sets (except for things like the Apple logo)

Absolutely I have those fonts. I no longer have any true font editor 
available, but I have other tools that show you what's available.  But I see 
you're thinking of Windows fonts ... the Mac has a different standard 
character set. The issue of the Mac not having the common fractions has 
irritated Mac users for years.

On Thu, 19 May 2005, Tim Murray wrote:

> was on a Web site using Safari and saw a 1/2 fraction on the screen in
> Verdana font.

Get Mozilla 1.3 for Mac OS 9  http://www.wamcom.org/  and view
 http://www.unics.uni-hannover.de/nhtcapri/multilingual1.html
with Geneva.

-- 
Top-posting.
What's the most irritating thing on Usenet?

On Thu, 19 May 2005, Tim Murray wrote:

>> I think that this is the source of your confusion.  "Most fonts" have,
>> in fact, always included the indicated fractions, , , and .  Even the
>> one you're using to view this message.
>
> But I'm pretty sure it's not true for fractions for many of the standard Type
> 1s like Times, Helvetica, Courier, and so on.

All TrueType fonts from Apple have included glyphs for *all*
Latin-1 characters from the beginning (~1990).
The _glyphs_ are in the fonts, although the MacRoman character set
does not include such _characters_. It is (or was) the job of the
application to access such glyphs. Most programs can't. Mozilla 1.3
for Mac OS 9 can.

-- 
Top-posting.
What's the most irritating thing on Usenet?

On Thu, 19 May 2005, Tim Murray wrote:

> I have the standard character set keycap chart from Adobe for their usual
> Type 1 library, and there are no fractions.

Forget the chart! Open your fonts with Fontographer (or other editor)
and you'll see glyphs for *all* Latin-1 characters.

> Further, I have binders-full of
> printouts from FontBook -- some new, some yellowing with age -- and there are
> no fractions.

That doesn't prove anything.

> Answer me this: What is the keystroke to get 1/2 from Adobe's Type 1 Times?

What is the keystroke to get the right, closing parenthesis?
On most European keyboards, it is shift-9.

You see, keystrokes are irrelevant and have nothing to do with your
problem.

BTW: I suggest you ask your questions in <news:comp.fonts> .

-- 
Top-posting.
What's the most irritating thing on Usenet?

On Thu, 19 May 2005, Tim Murray wrote:

> But I see
> you're thinking of Windows fonts ... the Mac has a different standard
> character set. The issue of the Mac not having the common fractions has
> irritated Mac users for years.

[I suggest you post to <news:comp.fonts> .]

You confuse:
- characters with glyphs,
- the MacRoman character set with the glyph repertoire of PS and
  TT fonts.

-- 
Top-posting.
What's the most irritating thing on Usenet?