Re: [css-fonts-3] i18n-ISSUE-300: ja-jp too verbose

On Sep 13, 2013, at 21:37 , ¸³ºÖ¿³ Bobby Tung <> wrote:

>> And wouldn¡¦t an example using *:lang(zh-Hant) be more appropriate than *:lang(zh-tw)?
> But I don't agree replace zh-tw by zh-Hant, because zh-Hant is used in Hongkong and Taiwan. 
> There are some glyphs come from Cantonese just used on Hongkong's context, Not all Traditional Chinese font contains those glyphs.
> So zh-tw and zh-hk would be better for usage.

The explanation for this example talks about "Traditional Chinese", and using zh-tw for traditional Chinese is obsolete. If the "Li Sung" font used in the example doesn't include the Hong Kong characters, you might use zh-Hant-TW (or, if compatibility with RFC 3066 is required, zh-TW), and describe that as "traditional Chinese as used in Taiwan".


Received on Monday, 16 September 2013 05:30:54 UTC