- From: Martin J. Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 17:54:34 +0900
- To: Shyjan Mahamud <mahamud@marr.ius.cs.cmu.edu>, www-font@w3.org
Hello Shyjan, you are right that the feature to mask out some part of a font is very desirable when creating virtual fonts (as you call them), and that the description in CSS2 doesn't say whether this can be done with unicode-range or not. I will forward this request to the relevant Working Groups within W3C. If you could help check out some implementations, that would be great. Regards, Martin. At 00/07/30 01:33 -0400, Shyjan Mahamud wrote: >hello, i am trying to better understand the role of the unicode-range >descriptor in the @font-face rule. as far as i can tell, this >descriptor is primarily intended to avoid downloading fonts that don't >contain glyphs of interest. however there are applications where you >would want to create "virtual fonts" from a bunch of fonts. the >example "Excelsior" shown on http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html >is close to what i am thinking of, but i need some clarification. >suppose you are defining a new virtual font "vfont" from two real >fonts "rfont1" and "rfont2". assume we want the unicode points U+00-FF >from "rfont1" and U+100-200 from "rfont2". >adapting the "Excelsior" example to this case, we would have something >like : > >@font-face { > font-family: vfont; > src: local(rfont1), url(...); > unicode-range: U+??; /* Latin-1 */ >} >@font-face { > font-family: vfont; > src: local(rfont2), url(...); > unicode-range: U+100-200; /* Latin Extended A and B */ >} >all this is clear. the question is what happens when the real fonts >rfont1 and rfont2 have overlapping unicode points, say for simplicity >they both have U+000-200. i would like characters in U+100-200 to be >picked up from only rfont2 and not rfont1 even though a user agent >can optimize by using only rfont1 for the whole range. i want to know if this >semantics is implied by the unicode-range descriptor. it is not >entirely clear from the CSS2 spec that this is the case since the >discussion there seems to be more devoted to avoiding having to >download fonts unnecessarily. in other words i am less interested in >specifying the actual range that a font contains, but rather i am >interested in specifying a subset of the actual range. > >- shyjan
Received on Monday, 31 July 2000 04:49:41 UTC