W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2000

Re: generic fonts and italic vs oblique

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 02:08:40 +0100
Message-ID: <38B9CA98.E14EF3A6@w3.org>
To: Tim Bagot <tsb@earth.li>
CC: Style Sheet mailing list <www-style@w3.org>


Tim Bagot wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Chris Lilley wrote:
> 
> > Or we could drop cursive and fantasy, as being basically useless....
> 
> I would certainly agree that fantasy seems rather useless, mainly because
> it is so vague. 

yes

> cursive, OTOH, is likely, IIUC, to be the usual style for
> Arabic, and various Indic scripts (and assorted others that don't spring
> to mind quite so quickly).

But that comes from their being written in a particular script, not from
one of five styling choices. Arabic is a connected script, but not
necessarily brushlike. It doesn't sharemuch with the assorted "cursive"
fonts used for the Latin alphabet.

--
Chris
Received on Sunday, 27 February 2000 20:08:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:04 GMT