- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 02:08:40 +0100
- To: Tim Bagot <tsb@earth.li>
- CC: Style Sheet mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
Tim Bagot wrote: > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Chris Lilley wrote: > > > Or we could drop cursive and fantasy, as being basically useless.... > > I would certainly agree that fantasy seems rather useless, mainly because > it is so vague. yes > cursive, OTOH, is likely, IIUC, to be the usual style for > Arabic, and various Indic scripts (and assorted others that don't spring > to mind quite so quickly). But that comes from their being written in a particular script, not from one of five styling choices. Arabic is a connected script, but not necessarily brushlike. It doesn't sharemuch with the assorted "cursive" fonts used for the Latin alphabet. -- Chris
Received on Sunday, 27 February 2000 20:08:43 UTC