Re: Downloadable fonts and image replacement

David Woolley schreef:
>> the secondary font file after all when it encounters characters that it=20
>> can't render, actually, it seems only logical, and it is what most UAs=20
>> do today. So I don't think there is a problem.
> 
> Laying aside the specific Microsoft consideration (although noting that
> you are using a Microsoft proprietary character encoding

Sorry, I have my email client to use Unicode, however if it replies to a 
message it chooses the same character encoding as the original message. 
Apparantly it recognises us-ascii as the OS default, windows-1252. I’ve 
now set it to always send messages as UTF-8.

But does it really matter in this discussion? No. Please stick to the 
point instead of making useless under-the-belt remarks.

> (and misusing a quote mark as an apostrophe)),

Unicode explicitly recommends to use the ’ as an apostrophe. See the 
note at code point 2019 of the specification [1]: “this is the preferred 
character to use for apostrophe”.

So I’m not misusing anything.

> the other problem is that current font
> rendering packages that support a proper font fallback tend to require
> the list of valid characters in a font to be known upfront.  The existing
> CSS fonts mechanism can cover this because they allow the valid character
> ranges to be specified in the CSS.

As the fonts provide character-to-glyph mappings, why would it be a 
problem to determine this? Specifying valid character ranges can help 
avoiding the download of a font if none of its characters are used, but 
I don’t think that would happen often anyway.


~Grauw

[1] http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U2000.pdf

-- 
Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.