W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-geo@w3.org > March 2003

Re: Re[2]: FW: acronym in title...

From: Mark Davis <mark.davis@jtcsv.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:05:04 -0800
Message-ID: <009c01c2ea54$3d786cd0$7900a8c0@DAVIS1>
To: "Roozbeh Pournader" <roozbeh@sharif.edu>
Cc: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>, <ishida@w3.org>, <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>, <public-i18n-geo@w3.org>, "Al Gilman" <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Good point, although you are safest in that case actually annotating with
the font, and not depending on the target system.

(Interestingly, a colleague pointed out that with TrueType, it is very easy
to do nasty spoofing. The hinting for each character is actually a little
program, and it can completely alter the shape of a character based on
environment. The same character in the same font may look like a "6" on a
Windows box, like a "X" on a Linux box, and like a 'peace sign' on a

IBM, MS 50-2/B11, 5600 Cottle Rd, SJ CA 95193
(408) 256-3148
fax: (408) 256-0799

----- Original Message -----
From: "Roozbeh Pournader" <roozbeh@sharif.edu>
To: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@jtcsv.com>
Cc: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>; <ishida@w3.org>;
<w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>; <public-i18n-geo@w3.org>; "Al Gilman"
<asgilman@iamdigex.net>; <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 09:44
Subject: Re: Re[2]: FW: acronym in title...

> On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Mark Davis wrote:
> > I wonder how realistic these scenarios are. The principal motivation for
> > fine-grained language tagging of individual words or phrases appears to
> > for text-to-speech, primarily for the blind.
> Or choosing an appropriate glyph for characters that have very different
> appearance in different languages, like the Persian 7 vs the Urdu 7, that
> share a codepoint but have different appearances.
> roozbeh
> PS: Just today, I showed a Maggie instant spaghetti pack to my mother and
> brother (both have a BSc) and asked them what do they think the weight is,
> by just looking at the Urdu text printed on the box and not the English.
> My brother said 40 grams and my mother couldn't comment. She said that it
> may be 10 grams, but this pack is much heavier. It was 70.
Received on Friday, 14 March 2003 13:05:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:03:03 UTC