W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2013

Re: real vs. synthetic width glyphs

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 01:05:30 -0700 (PDT)
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <1587927695.988655.1372838730746.JavaMail.zimbra@mozilla.com>

Just one additional note, the notes written up for the discussion that
Elika had regarding tatechuyoko while she was in Japan include the
following paragraph [1]:

この意見は参加者のうち、タイプデザイナーとフォント制作者という「フォント制作に関わる人たち」が主張。
なるほど、フォントを作っている人からすれば「せっかく組んだ時に美しくなるようにグリフを用意しているのだからそれを使って欲しい」
と思うのは当然だろう。 この「グリフが用意されているならそれを使う」という条件には全員が同意。

The last sentence, roughly translated, says "Everyone agreed with the
statement that if a [variant] glyph was available it should be used." 
The paragraphs after that note that there was disagreement as to what
to do if the glyphs were not available.

This seems to dovetail nicely with what I'm saying here -- if width
variant glyphs are available they should be used, if not then I'm fine
to just say that the user agent uses some method to fit the glyphs
to the appropriate width.  I think this is much more reasonable than 
leaving the feature definition completely undefined as it is now.

Cheers,

John

[1] http://d.hatena.ne.jp/akane_neko/20130613/1371142756
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 08:05:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 3 July 2013 08:05:58 UTC