W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2013

Re: [css-fonts] Chinese font Kai count as cursive

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 00:58:27 -0500
To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: 董福興 Bobby Tung <bobbytung@wanderer.tw>, W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CEABD689.4D68C%kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
>>   4. Add these examples to definition of 'cursive', same as for
>>      'serif' and 'sans-serif': Kaisho (Japanese), Kai (Chinese).
>
>Kaisho for Japanese is not really correct.  That's a more formal,
>calligraphic style. As the existing example illustrates, Gyoshotai is
>more appropriate.  As for Kai, I defer to the opinion of others.

I'm good with either Kaisho or Gyosho, or both. Both "looks more like
handwritten pen or brush writing than printed letterwork", but John is
right that Gyosho is more cursive than Kaisho is.

Sosho is the translation of "cursive" according to my dictionary, but it
may be too cursive. I'm fine to list all these three, or one/two of them.

The "tai" suffix means "style", which could also be appended to Mincho or
Kaisho, so "Gyosho" might be more consistent.

/koji
Received on Friday, 15 November 2013 05:58:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:37 UTC