- From: John Hudson <john@tiro.ca>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:56:45 -0700
- To: Andrew Cunningham <lang.support@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad.esfahbod@gmail.com>, Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com>
+ Peter Constable On 11/07/16 11:44, Andrew Cunningham wrote: > I am currently leaning towards locl being a dead feature for minority > languages ... in terms of browser support (neither > font-language-override or lang/xml:lang support is there in a cross > browser fashion), and maybe its best to support minority languages > through a mix of separate forks of fonts or alternative features. There's been some talk of a mechanism within OTL to specify ISO tags as OT language system tags, thereby avoiding the need to register separate OT language system tags for all languages. If language is indeed the basis on which one wishes to invoke a <locl> glyph or behaviour variation — it isn't always — then such a mechanism would enable this. J. -- John Hudson Tiro Typeworks Ltd www.tiro.com Salish Sea, BC tiro@tiro.com Getting Spiekermann to not like Helvetica is like training a cat to stay out of water. But I'm impressed that people know who to ask when they want to ask someone to not like Helvetica. That's progress. -- David Berlow
Received on Monday, 11 July 2016 18:57:18 UTC