W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: [css3-fonts] font selection for Unicode Variation Selector

From: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 14:35:53 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTinV4J_59xGUw_JRTkXK=WaSTPv_icnEDOG9=Tbj@mail.gmail.com>
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Cc: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, "CJK discussion (public-i18n-cjk@w3.org)" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, "'WWW International' (www-international@w3.org)" <www-international@w3.org>
2011/2/24 Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>:
> These experiences feel me that it's like what I had in '80 or early '90 before Unicode; the code point were shared among the locales, and therefore you have to apply Latin font to Latin text and East Asian font to East Asian text by yourself. If you apply incorrect fonts, glyphs will be broken. Unicode came in to rescue, where code point determines the glyph (non-formatting information) and font determines styles.

But Unicode never truly came to the rescue, as code point alone never
truly determines the glyph. Common ambiguities, depending on whether
you use a CJK font or not, are the various opening and closing
quotation marks (very different spacing), the ellipsis (whether we
will get a true ellipsis or a CJK three-dot leader), and the em- and
en-dashes (whether an em-dash will be twice as wide as ann en-dash,
whether two em-dashes will get you an unbroken two-em dash, etc.).

I have always found it necessary to span a lot of things. That said,
there are just a lot of situations where you canít span anything
(e.g., itís a blog comment, the CMS will delete your spans, etc.)

-- 
cheers,
-ambrose

my thoughts on HTML5: http://goo.gl/vhv5F + http://goo.gl/leonq
(thanks and no thanks)
Received on Saturday, 26 February 2011 19:38:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 26 February 2011 19:38:29 GMT