W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > January to March 1998

Re: Freely downloadable font with all ideographs --> large font usage ?

From: Sam X. Sun <ssun@CNRI.Reston.Va.US>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 1998 01:40:07 -0500
Message-ID: <002801bd4281$71c39760$d7019784@ssun2.CNRI.Reston.Va.US>
To: "Simon Daniels" <simonda@microsoft.com>
Cc: <www-font@w3.org>
Hi, Simon,

Thanks for the information! I didn't think much on the performance side.
When I played with some CJK fonts, it didn't seem too bad, but they are much
smaller than the Cyberbit one though. Here is my question on large font

If I understand correctly, anytime I use a font, the entire font file is
loaded into the memory space, which potentially hurts the performance if the
font is too big. For Unicode font that contains more than one native
character set, is there any way to load part of the font for a specific
native character set, instead of loading it entirely? Or maybe the API
already handles it that way? I'm thinking in terms of rendering a Unicode
encoded document, with a specific language tag defined in it. It seems that
using a large font carrying all native characters could be helpful since it
doesn't require collection of font files for every native character set.


I'm not sure if the question fits in this list, if not, please advise. And
thanks to everyone for responding my earlier question!

-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Daniels <simonda@microsoft.com>
To: www-font@w3.org <www-font@w3.org>
Date: Wednesday, February 25, 1998 11:17 PM
Subject: RE: Freely downloadable font with all ideographs defined in ISO

>Monotype's WorldType(tm) http://www.monotype.com/html/oem/uni_intro.html
>possibly offers an alternative to Cyberbit.
>Although I've not used Monotype's font, I've experienced performance
>problems with huge fonts. In most cases I think you're better off with a
>range of fonts covering the various scripts you require.
>On the subject of Cyberbit, I'm curious about what happened to the other
>fonts being produced by Bitstream for inclusion with Navigator 4. Maybe
>has heard a rumor about these?
Received on Thursday, 26 February 1998 01:37:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:37:30 UTC