How to get access alternate glyphs from open type fonts in..

In later Word versions, the usual access is to open the Insert Symbol
dialogue, assure that the appropriate font is selected in the Font
slot, that Unicode is selected in the second slot of Character
code from .
Within that dialogue, you can initiate the AutoCorrect dialogue to
automate the process.

If the font were Postscript rather than OpenType or TrueType, you would use
Alt + keypad numerals together with a character code chart from Adobe to
insert symbols.

I know it is neither the most intuitive nor most easy of method that could
have been devised. However, Microsoft, to date, has shown more interest in
implementing support for a wide range of languages than supporting
typographic niceties. Perhaps soon we shall see the hopes and plans of many
in Microsoft Typography begin realization. Windows 7 will soon enter beta
testing. I don't know what, if anything, has been done there but I have
hope.

While font support is primarily an operating system function in Windows,
Adobe's In Design application has implemented broader support.

--

Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007





"StargateFan" <IDon'tAcceptSpam@NoJunkMail.com> wrote in message
news:kddgi45l5tugn2vln4r9r8feokc88ka57d@4ax.com...
>I thought perhaps W2K might not support the extra, alternate glyphs of
> Open Type fonts (.otf) but this thread seems to suggest otherwise:
> http://groups.google.ca/group/microsoft.public.word.conversions/browse...read/th
> This message implies it might be more of an OS issue, if I've
> understood correctly.
>
> But my question is, how do we acces the extra glyphs. I have an open
> type font that I know has 3 forms of capital F since it came with a
> pdf guide that outlines what alternate characters it has. These
> script OTFs have an abundance of flourishes and swashes that I'd like
> to access from Word. But despite a lot of legwork this morning
> googling and googling and googling, I can't figure out how to get them
> to work, even for later Word versions. It's just not clear how to get
> those extra characters.
>
> Does anyone know how to use them in Word, pls?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> p.s., though not strictly related, check out this excellent photoshop
> guide for using OTFs (one tutorial, 3 links, just in case one doesn't
> work):
> http://www.oman3d.com/tutorials/photoshop/video/open_type_font.php
> http://www.tutorial-center.com/tutorials/view/3876/_Open_Type_Font_Emb...ishment
> http://www.fstutorials.com/tutorial/photoshop/open_type_font_embellishments/3410
> I need to be able to work with the extra characters in OTF in Word vs.
> a graphics editor.
>

Tom Ferguson wrote:

> In later Word versions, the usual access is to open the Insert Symbol
> dialogue, assure that the appropriate font is selected in the Font
> slot, that Unicode is selected in the second slot of
> Character code from .
> Within that dialogue, you can initiate the AutoCorrect
> dialogue to automate the process.

[Aside:] Was something supposed to be there where there are large gaps
above? If it was something like smart quotes, somewhere between your
keyboard and my screen they got replaced with spaces. [End of aside]

That works fine (as does Charmap) for glyphs that have assigned
unicode values, as most of Adobe's opentype fonts do. It doesn't work
for glyphs that have no unicode value assigned, and these are what
Stargate Fan is looking for. For example, Adobe's Arno Pro-Regular
includes hundreds of non-unicoded glyphs. For example, ligatures for
ch and ct, which simply can't be found in the insert symbol table or
in Charmap.

> If the font were Postscript rather than OpenType or TrueType, you would
> use Alt + keypad numerals together with a character code chart from
> Adobe to insert symbols.

Tom, you lost me there. What does Adobe have to do with it (unless
it's a font from Adobe)? OpenType (.otf) fonts ARE 'Postscript' fonts.
Once you're in the opentype world, the only signficant difference
between Type 1 flavor ot and truetype flavor ot (.ttf) is the way that
the glyph outlines are drawn. (Yes, there are some subtle other
differences such as hinting methods and table requirements.)

> I know it is neither the most intuitive nor most easy of method that
> could have been devised.

That may be true, but try to develop something substantially better. I
know I can't!

> However, Microsoft, to date, has shown more
> interest in implementing support for a wide range of languages

And MS does that quite well.

> than supporting typographic niceties.

> Perhaps soon we shall see the hopes
> and plans of many in Microsoft Typography begin realization. Windows 7
> will soon enter beta testing. I don't know what, if anything, has been
> done there but I have hope.

The rumours I've heard would tend to drown that hope From a
cost-benefit viewpoint, I can't see that MS implementing typography
would significantly increase sales of either the operating system or
MS Office, and a higher-priced niche product would only compete with
the established leader.

> While font support is primarily an operating system function in Windows,
> Adobe's In Design application has implemented broader support.

- Character

On Nov 22, 7:30 pm, Character <C....DeleteThis@cters.bold.italic> wrote:
> Tom Ferguson wrote:
> > In later Word versions, the usual access is to open the Insert Symbol
> > dialogue, assure that the appropriate font is selected in the     Font
> > slot, that    Unicode     is selected in the second slot  of    
> > Character code    from      .
> > Within that dialogue, you can initiate the     AutoCorrect      
> > dialogue to automate the process.
>
> [Aside:] Was something supposed to be there where there are large gaps
> above? If it was something like smart quotes, somewhere between your
> keyboard and my screen they got replaced with spaces. [End of aside]
>
> That works fine (as does Charmap) for glyphs that have assigned
> unicode values, as most of Adobe's opentype fonts do. It doesn't work
> for glyphs that have no unicode value assigned, and these are what
> Stargate Fan is looking for. For example, Adobe's Arno Pro-Regular
> includes hundreds of non-unicoded glyphs. For example, ligatures for
> ch and ct, which simply can't be found in the insert symbol table or
> in Charmap.

Does that mean it might be possible to find a genuine Fraktur font
that contains the required (not optional) ligatures used there? Adobe
PostScript Wittenberg Fraktur for Mac had them, and there was
apparently even a setting in some German OS's for producing them
automatically (as FrameMaker's Enable Kerning Pairs made fi and fl and
ffi appear automatically), but in the character set shown for the font
bearing that name, those ligatures no longer appear.

(I _need_ a genuine Fraktur font that will work in Word2007/Vista, and
none appears to exist.)

(I'll have InDesign CS4 by the time I need to deal with a classical
German text.)

> > If the font were Postscript rather than OpenType or TrueType, you would
> > use Alt + keypad numerals together with a character code chart from
> > Adobe to insert symbols.
>
> Tom, you lost me there. What does Adobe have to do with it (unless
> it's a font from Adobe)? OpenType (.otf) fonts ARE 'Postscript' fonts.
> Once you're in the opentype world, the only signficant difference
> between Type 1 flavor ot and truetype flavor ot (.ttf) is the way that
> the glyph outlines are drawn. (Yes, there are some subtle other
> differences such as hinting methods and table requirements.)
>
> > I know it is neither the most intuitive nor most easy of method that
> > could have been devised.
>
> That may be true, but try to develop something substantially better. I
> know I can't!
>
> > However, Microsoft, to date, has shown more
> > interest in implementing support for a wide range of languages
>
> And MS does that quite well.
>
> > than supporting typographic niceties.
>
>  > Perhaps soon we shall  see the hopes
>
> > and plans of many in Microsoft Typography begin realization. Windows 7
> > will soon enter beta testing. I don't know what, if anything, has been
> > done there but I have hope.
>
> The rumours I've heard would tend to drown that hope  From a
> cost-benefit viewpoint, I can't see that MS implementing typography
> would significantly increase sales of either the operating system or
> MS Office, and a higher-priced niche product would only compete with
> the established leader.
>
> > While font support is primarily an operating system function in Windows,
> > Adobe's In Design application has implemented broader support.
>
>    - Character

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 13:19:43 -0400, "Tom Ferguson"
<tom.newsgroups.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:

>In later Word versions, the usual access is to open the Insert Symbol
>dialogue, assure that the appropriate font is selected in the Font
>slot, that Unicode is selected in the second slot of Character
>code from .
>Within that dialogue, you can initiate the AutoCorrect dialogue to
>automate the process.
>
>If the font were Postscript rather than OpenType or TrueType, you would use
>Alt + keypad numerals together with a character code chart from Adobe to
>insert symbols.
>
>I know it is neither the most intuitive nor most easy of method that could
>have been devised. However, Microsoft, to date, has shown more interest in
>implementing support for a wide range of languages than supporting
>typographic niceties. Perhaps soon we shall see the hopes and plans of many
>in Microsoft Typography begin realization. Windows 7 will soon enter beta
>testing. I don't know what, if anything, has been done there but I have
>hope.
>
>While font support is primarily an operating system function in Windows,
>Adobe's In Design application has implemented broader support.
>
>--
>
>Tom
>MSMVP 1998-2007

Thank you, much appreciated!

I never realized that my bent was something called "Typography", which
you mention above, but my research yesterday led to that "new" term
for me.

I hope as well that there will be more of this in the future. When I
was looking into this yesterday, I found a fantastic Photoshop
tutorial that shows some of the effects that can be achieved. I know
that we're talking Word here, but imagine if Word could also do some
of this as easily?? Boggles the mind. It woud be exciting:

http://www.oman3d.com/tutorials/photoshop/video/open_type_font.php
http://www.tutorial-center.com/tutorials/view/3876/_Open_Type_Font_Emb...ishment
http://www.fstutorials.com/tutorial/photoshop/open_type_font_embellishments/3410
(3 separate links because sometimes not all links work for all
people).

Thanks! D

>"StargateFan" <IDon'tAcceptSpam@NoJunkMail.com> wrote in message
>news:kddgi45l5tugn2vln4r9r8feokc88ka57d@4ax.com...
>>I thought perhaps W2K might not support the extra, alternate glyphs of
>> Open Type fonts (.otf) but this thread seems to suggest otherwise:
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/microsoft.public.word.conversions/browse...read/th
>> This message implies it might be more of an OS issue, if I've
>> understood correctly.
>>
>> But my question is, how do we acces the extra glyphs. I have an open
>> type font that I know has 3 forms of capital F since it came with a
>> pdf guide that outlines what alternate characters it has. These
>> script OTFs have an abundance of flourishes and swashes that I'd like
>> to access from Word. But despite a lot of legwork this morning
>> googling and googling and googling, I can't figure out how to get them
>> to work, even for later Word versions. It's just not clear how to get
>> those extra characters.
>>
>> Does anyone know how to use them in Word, pls?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> p.s., though not strictly related, check out this excellent photoshop
>> guide for using OTFs (one tutorial, 3 links, just in case one doesn't
>> work):
>> http://www.oman3d.com/tutorials/photoshop/video/open_type_font.php
>> http://www.tutorial-center.com/tutorials/view/3876/_Open_Type_Font_Emb...ishment
>> http://www.fstutorials.com/tutorial/photoshop/open_type_font_embellishments/3410
>> I need to be able to work with the extra characters in OTF in Word vs.
>> a graphics editor.
>>

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:21:39 -0800, Character <Char.RemoveThis@cters.bold.italic>
wrote:

>StargateFan wrote:
>
>> I thought perhaps W2K might not support the extra, alternate glyphs of
>> Open Type fonts (.otf) but this thread seems to suggest otherwise:
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/microsoft.public.word.conversions/browse...read/th
>> This message implies it might be more of an OS issue, if I've
>> understood correctly.
>
>Yes you understood correctly, but the message is wrong on a number of
>counts.
>
>One, it is not strictly an OS issue. Adobe InDesign, Illustrator, and
>Photoshop under Windows can access the alternate glyphs through their
>'glyph palette' and similar features.
>
>Second, you CAN access SOME of the glyphs but ONLY the ones that have
>Unicode values associated with them. You can either use Charmap
>(Character Map - /Start/Run/Charmap) to cut and paste or, in MS Word,
>type the Unicode value in hex and then immediately type Alt-X.
>
>Unfortunately, the alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, small caps,
>numeral variations, etc. are NOT unicoded in most open type fonts.
>They cannot be accessed by any current MS applications, up to and
>including MS Office 2007 running under Vista.
>
>> But my question is, how do we acces the extra glyphs.
>
>The answer is to use applications that are aware of contemporary
>computer typographical features, such as those mentioned above.
>
>> I have an open
>> type font that I know has 3 forms of capital F since it came with a
>> pdf guide that outlines what alternate characters it has. These
>> script OTFs have an abundance of flourishes and swashes that I'd like
>> to access from Word. But despite a lot of legwork this morning
>> googling and googling and googling, I can't figure out how to get them
>> to work, even for later Word versions. It's just not clear how to get
>> those extra characters.
>>
>> Does anyone know how to use them in Word, pls?
>
>I haven't tried this with non-unicoded glyphs, but maybe it's possible
>to create text in InDesign and copy and paste it into a Word document.
>InDesign does NOT have the ability to export or save as a word
>document, although it does support exporting to Rich Text Format (RTF)
>which Word can input.
>
>> p.s., though not strictly related, check out this excellent photoshop
>> guide for using OTFs (one tutorial, 3 links, just in case one doesn't
>> work):
>> http://www.oman3d.com/tutorials/photoshop/video/open_type_font.php
>> http://www.tutorial-center.com/tutorials/view/3876/_Open_Type_Font_Emb...ishment
>> http://www.fstutorials.com/tutorial/photoshop/open_type_font_embellishments/3410
>
>> I need to be able to work with the extra characters in OTF in Word vs.
>> a graphics editor.
>
>Maybe SOMEbody will (or already has?) come up with something similar
>to Charmap that can display all of the glyphs in any OTF font and let
>you at least copy and paste them.
>
> - Character

Drat. I had looked at charmap and the extra glyphs didn't appear
there. I'm guessing more because I don't exactly know what I'm doing
here <g>.

I did find BabelMap which was one of the 3 apps that would help
suggested in one of these Word ngs. No go there, but I'm not sure
here either what I'm supposed to do, exactly, to see the extras.

What was surprising was how long ago Open Type fonts were being
discussed -- 2000 was the earliest date I took note of! Odd that we
don't seem to be much further along today. Not for a lack of want on
the part of the users ... though I suspect a lot has to do with how
few know about them let alone what they could allow us to accomplish!
<g>

Well, I believe the type of workaround that could do the job for now
would be to find a small utility that actually _did_ access those
extra characters and then I'd somehow screenshot it/them and put into
Word as a graphic. Not ideal, but I work with the perpetual problem
of never having the types of tools at work that I do at home <g>. So
a Word workaround is best I'll be able to do for now.

I think that's what I'll try to figure out how to do.

Thx! D

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:30:03 -0800, Character <Char.TakeThisOut@cters.bold.italic>
wrote:

>Tom Ferguson wrote:

[snip]

>> Perhaps soon we shall see the hopes
>> and plans of many in Microsoft Typography begin realization. Windows 7
>> will soon enter beta testing. I don't know what, if anything, has been
>> done there but I have hope.
>
>The rumours I've heard would tend to drown that hope From a
>cost-benefit viewpoint, I can't see that MS implementing typography
>would significantly increase sales of either the operating system or
>MS Office, and a higher-priced niche product would only compete with
>the established leader.
>
>> While font support is primarily an operating system function in Windows,
>> Adobe's In Design application has implemented broader support.
>
> - Character

Drat once more!

Well I will monitor this from now on, but I suspect this to be true.
The above makes too much sense, unfortunately! Always comes down to
the dollar, doesn't it?