- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 20:50:13 +0300
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
On Monday, Oct 20, 2003, at 19:56 Europe/Helsinki, Chris Lilley wrote: > HS> Then there's the practice of transferring Latin gibberish and > applying > HS> a font that is a Latin font from the system's point of view but > HS> contains glyphs for another script. I think CSS 2.1 should not > HS> accommodate fontifying Latin gibberish to look like text in a > minority > HS> script in browsers that happen to support such a trick. > > I agree, so its handy that CSS 2 dissallows such a practice. But wat > does that have to do with downloading fonts in general? The part that I quoted was: "With respect to minority scripts, no - the fact that you can read it does not mean automatically that your computer system comes with support for it." If the system doesn't support the script, what does downloading a properly encoded font help? If the system already knows how to deal with the script but doesn't come bundled with a font, it is (in my opinion) reasonable to expect the user to supply the required font. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://www.iki.fi/hsivonen/
Received on Monday, 20 October 2003 13:51:07 UTC