W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-amaya@w3.org > January to March 2000

RE: Unicode/UTF-8 (was: Problems with Amaya 2.4)

From: Dave J Woolley <DJW@bts.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 13:04:26 -0000
Message-ID: <81E4A2BC03CED111845100104B62AFB5824442@stagecoach.bts.co.uk>
To: "'www-amaya@w3.org'" <www-amaya@w3.org>
> From:	Bertrand.Ibrahim@cui.unige.ch [SMTP:Bertrand.Ibrahim@cui.unige.ch]
> 
> Dave J Woolley <DJW@bts.co.uk> said:
> > There are very few Unicode encoded fonts, and I doubt
> > there are any UTF-8 encoded fonts;
> 
> You don't need to have a single font cover the whole Unicode space, as
> long
> as the software knows which font to use for a given character code.
> Internet
> Explorer 5 and Netscape Navigator 4 already handle appropriately documents
> that declare a UTF-8 charset.
> 
	But you still need Unicode encoded fonts.  The font that
	covers the most useful maths characters on MS platforms is
	Symbol, which is not Unicode encoded.  Windows NT 4 comes
	with Lucida Sans Unicode, which does have Unicode encoded
	maths symbols, but there is only that one font; it is far
	from a complete Unicode font.

	Presumably for marketing reasons, Windows 9x doesn't include
	this font, although you might be able to get CJK fonts for the
           browsers
	(LSU doesn't include CJK).

	Office 2000 will reportedly include a nearly complete Unicode
	font, but that is not being offered as a free upgrade, presumably
	again for marketing reasons.

	IE5 can only map fonts by language (really meaning source
	character set) and has no obvious provision for assigning
	a font for maths use (most maths symbols are probably currently
	entered by abusing font selections to select the non-Unicode 
	Symbol 
Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2000 08:08:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:21 UTC