- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 18:08:41 -0500
- To: tlk@kobysh.com
- CC: 'WWW International' <www-international@w3.org>, Unicode Mailing List <unicode@unicode.org>
tlk@kobysh.com wrote: > fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>さん: > >>In that case should the W3C CSS3 Text spec recommend the use of U+FE45 >>for emphasis marks? > > It is another "chicken and egg" problem. > If Japanese market **implicit** requirement is so strong and W3C will > support the use of SEASAME DOT, it encourage or enforce Japanese font > vendors to support SEASAME DOT fonts :-) CSS has a font fallback mechanism, so as long as there is at least one font that has the glyph, the character can be displayed. An application could even ship with its own font that consists only of the glyphs it needs for text-emphasis, so that even if there are no fonts on the system that have the glyph, it can still be rendered. So the chicken and egg problem is not a problem. :) What is a problem is knowing enough to specify what the application must do with the glyph in the font, assuming it has one. BTW -- what happens if the emphasized word also has ruby? ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 13 March 2006 23:08:57 UTC