Submitter: Henderson

Addressed to: JTC1/SC 24/WG 6 Rapporteur Group on ISO/IEC 8632, CGM

WG secretariat: NNI

Date Circulated by WG secretariat: 1 February 1995

Deadline on response from editor: : 1 May 1995

Defect Report concerning IS 8632:1992 Computer Graphics: Metafile for the storage and transfer of picture description information (CGM) Part 1, Functional

specification.

Qualifier (e.g. error, omission, clarification required): Clarification.

References in document (e.g. page, clause, figure and/or table numbers):

Amendment 1, Annex H.

Nature of defect (complete, concise explanation of the perceived problem):

This is a tricky question. About PostScript characters in ISO Latin 1. Specifically, what about the codes 47 octal and 140 octal. In 8859-1 these are named APOSTROPHE and ACCENT GRAVE. In PS Language Reference, the are called QUOTERIGHT and QUOTELEFT. (In fact Adobe’s names differ for a lot of their "ISO Latin 1" characters, while the character looks the same pretty much). In 8859-1 standard, the font is a san-serif. APOSTROPHE is a vertical tick, GRAVE ACCENT is a left leaning tick. I have seen it printed this way even in serif font on an HP LJ4, and it was rasterized this way by GhostScript from a PostScript file. In both cases the "tick" is actually like a smoothly tapered wedge, thicker at the top than at the bottom. The PostScript Language Manual shows, and some PostScript printers produce, a different looking glyph. Sort of like "smart quotes", the QUOTELEFT is concave facing right with a ball or thickening at the bottom, QUOTERIGHT is concave facing left with a ball or thickening at the top. Definitely a different glyph. In samples I’ve looked at, the QUOTERIGHT variation (apostrophe) seems common in serif fonts. Although as I said I have at least two examples of interpreters that make it look like 8859-1 even for a serif font.

The question: is it a different *character*, or is it an allowable typeface variation on the intended character? You will note in Amd.1, the TimesRoman page, that the glyph in 140 (octal), QUOTELEFT, which is supposed to be GRAVE ACCENT, is not the same glyph as is used to perform a grave accent on characters like "CAPITAL A GRAVE ACCENT".

Editor's response (any material proposed for processing as a technical corrigendum to, an amendment to, or a commentary on the International Standard or DIS final text is attached separately to this completed report):

The glyph names in H.2.1 should be more closely aligned with 8859-1. The names are sufficiently close in all cases except char numbers 39 and 96. The glyph representations in H.2.1 are acceptable. In H.2.1 ISO Latin1 Encoding table replace "quoteright" with "apostrophe" at char number 39 replace "quoteleft" with "grave" at char number 96