- From: Tom Croucher <tcroucher@netalleynetworks.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 17:24:15 +0100 (BST)
- To: <foliot@wats.ca>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
*snip* > As part of the article, the entire Unicode table of glyphs is presented along with the encodings required for rendering in (X)HTML. However, without the font packs installed (and a Unicode Inuktitut keyboard driver for Windows NT 4, Windows 2000 or Windows XP - not sure about Macs) the end user (for the most part, you folk) will NOT get the character rendering. The question I would raise here is where do we draw the line? Either using unimplemented standards to the users' disadvantage because of the equipment they have access too or using a technique which would be frowned on in order to compensate for the lack of proper support. The UA debate is an old one and this seems to be yet another incarnation. My own feeling is that using images is generally not a good step and that it would quickly become unmaintainable. Unicode on the other hand will only become more accessible to groups as time goes on. Tom
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2003 12:24:31 UTC