W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2010

Re: [css3-fonts] unicode-range and unicode normalization

From: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 18:15:50 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTilfu7eKY1W8pBJyFmqfzeE45ndmLC7uP1AYPriP@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Yuzo Fujishima <yuzo@google.com>, www-style@w3.org, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 3:43 PM, timeless <timeless@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 6:06 AM, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com> wrote:
>>> This starts to push into the realm of saving users from themselves. In
>>> general, I don't think we should burden implementations with complex
>>> error handling requirements like this unless it's really a common
>>> occurrence that's hard for the author to work around.
>>
>> Do you mean something like the Font Problems that Fedora has:
>> http://ianweller.org/2010/07/12/another-double-post-fedoras-fonts-and-more-datanommer/
>>
>> It seems they're shopping for a replacement, but I'm more interested in today.
>
> I don't think that's what's being talked about here.
>
> It appears that Fedora's problem is simply that their font doesn't
> have accented characters at all.  fantasai and jdaggett are talking
> about a specific problem where a composed glyph crosses element
> boundaries.

Agreed. The font doesn't support the characters they need, so they're
looking at other fonts. Different case.

T
Received on Wednesday, 14 July 2010 01:16:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:29 GMT