W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2004

Re: font-family: IPA

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 01:56:47 +0200
Message-ID: <1055931286.20040510015647@w3.org>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>, W3C CSS List <www-style@w3.org>

On Sunday, May 9, 2004, 10:50:05 PM, Ian wrote:


IH> On Sun, 9 May 2004, Ernest Cline wrote:
>>
>> [no way to detect IPA fonts]

IH> Not really much point adding it to CSS then.

I agree that a special-case addition to CSS is not needed.

Puzzled by the references to Panose (a system of describing Latin
glyph design axes) to this - the correct descriptor is clearly
unicode-range.

http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/fonts.html#dataqual

IPA extensions is the 0250 block (0250 to 02AF)

http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0250.pdf

so describing a font as an IPA font is a case of

@font-face {
 unicode-range: 25?;
 font-family: WhateverIPA;
 font-src: url(http://example.org/fonts/ipa/Whatever.svg) format(svg)
 }

>> It would probably be simpler to check the font to see if it contained
>> characters from the IPA Extensions block.

IH> Don't most "Unicode complete" fonts like Lucida Unicode and Arial Unicode
IH> contain glyphs in that block?

Yes, but the converse is not true. A font which is not 'unicode
complete' (monolithic) may well have glyphs in that block. Indeed, most
fonts specific for IPA do *not* attempt complete Unicode coverage.



-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Sunday, 9 May 2004 19:56:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:29 GMT