usage of terminology 'codepoints' in patch subset spec. about ift HOT 6 CLOSED

Perhaps Codepoint reordering should be named something more precise, like Index Generation. Because it takes codepoints as input, but does not generate new codepoints; instead it generates index values.

from ift.

I would agree to the analysis, although some sections other than the section on codepoint reordering also need to be updated - which refer outputs from reordering.
Also I suppose it might be better to think about codepoint_ordering also?

from ift.

@garretrieger @litherum this one is not moving forward, let's discuss on the call today?

from ift.

@himorin does the revised wording at 4.1. Font Subset and 4.7. Codepoint Reordering resolve your comment?

As you will see at 4.3.3. PatchRequest codepoint and glyph index are now being used as distinct concepts.

from ift.

@svgeesus Thank you for updates. I believe current terminologies resolve my confused points, and I am happy to close this.

from ift.

micronit: Although i'm always tempted to write codepoint (one word), i think the more usual way (per Unicode Standard) is code points (two words). I'm sure it's perfectly understandable as is, though, so just mentioning this to be pedantic.

from ift.