W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2002

Re: Comments on CSS3 Fonts module

From: Peter Sheerin <pete@petesguide.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 16:53:05 -0700
Message-ID: <00b101c270b8$2df96e50$8810960a@cadpkslaptop>
To: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>, <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>

> >> > Also, the set of characters specified in the current HTML DTDs is
> >> > not really sufficient to display many important characters, [...]
>
>
> That comment seemed to be a misunderstanding about the range of
> allowed characters. Its not just ASCII+named character entities - its
> all of Unicode.

I guess I wasn't clear enough in what problem I thought a note would solve. It
seems to me that since the rest of Unicode isn't explicitly referenced by entity
definitions in the DTD, some UA developers have thought that the rest were "not
specified/not important/not required" or something similar, and that an explicit
comment stating that this is not the case _might_ convince more UA and font
developers to include far more complete Unicode support in their products,
including support for combining characters.

And a comment advising the practice of glyph substitution (from a font with the
characters) would also help in that goal. All of this may be implied by reading
the spec and DTD correctly, but stating it succinctly might increase the number
of UAs that render a wide range of Unicode characters.

Mozilla is pretty damn good here, but few other browsers are as close, and even
Moz is hampered by bugs in fonts (claiming to include characters that they don't
have glyphs for).
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2002 19:54:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:16 GMT