- From: Adam Twardoch (List) <list.adam@twardoch.com>
- Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 02:16:28 -0600
- To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- CC: "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Bert Bos wrote: >>> Moreover, I don't think it is a requirement that CSS supports all >>> OT features. A handful of the more common ones is enough. If a >>> designer wants a specific feature of a specific font, he can make a >>> new font (or a virtual font) in which that feature is turned on. >>> That's what we have @font-face for. Bert, I'm not sure I fully understand what you mean by "that feature is turned on". Certainly, for the simplest case of one-to-one substitutions, one can imagine remapping the alternate glyphs to Unicode codepoints of their source glyphs, and creating static subsets holding such fonts. But this is not a workable solution for many OpenType Layout features that involve positioning, one-to-many substitutions, many-to-one substitutions (e.g. ligatures) or contextual substitutions. I realize the desire for CSS to remain agnostic with regard to specific techniques, but I don't believe this is always practical. For example, CSS specifically picks one particular color model (RGB) rather than being color-model-agnostic. Web standards such as HTML or XML often refer to other international standards such as ISO/IEC 10646 / Unicode, so it is practical to remember that OpenType has been standardized as Open Font Format (ISO/IEC 14496-22). Finally, typography is the very core and essence of the web. The web has been created with hypertext in mind, and hypertext heavily relies on typography. Best, Adam -- Adam Twardoch | Language Typography Unicode Fonts OpenType | twardoch.com | silesian.com | fontlab.net Reporter: "So what will your trip to Ireland look like?" Lech Wałęsa: "I get into a car, then onto a plane, and then the other way around."
Received on Saturday, 31 October 2009 08:17:06 UTC