- From: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
- Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 12:32:27 -0800
- To: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
- CC: Jonathan Kew <jonathan@jfkew.plus.com>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, www-style@w3.org, public-i18n-cjk@w3.org, www-international@w3.org, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
[bcc'd to mpeg-OTspec] Asmus Freytag wrote: > In this context, the way a CSS statement like > > font-family: 'My Favorite Font', 'Some generic font', 'Special IVS > Font', 'Generic IVS Font'; > > ought to work is that it sets up a composite font selection on the fly. > Each grapheme cluster would then be rendered at the first font > encountered that is able to render it. But using an actual composite font, perhaps it could be possible to define which grapheme clusters are rendered by which component fonts, avoiding the problem that I understood Koji-san to be be describing, in which the preferred rendering of individual grapheme clusters might not be capturable by fallback ordering. Taking your font-family order, for example, what if both 'Special IVS Font' and 'Generic IVS Font' were able to render grapheme clusters foo and bar, but the preferred rendering for foo is that provided by 'Special IVS Font' and the preferred rendering for bar is that provided by 'Generic IVS Font'. At the moment, if I recall correctly, the proposed composite font format only specifies which Unicode ranges would be rendered by which component font, but it seems to me that it might be desirable to be able to specify individual variation selector sequences as overrides. JH
Received on Saturday, 26 February 2011 20:35:05 UTC