On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote: > It just provides a glyph that could be used for characters that are not > covered. However, other fonts in the font-family list, or the generic font > family, or a system fallback font, might have coverage. And even if they do > not, the actual 'missing glyph' might be drawn from the svg font, or drawn > from any other font n the list (commonly, the last one on the list). > > ROC> I can't find anything in the spec to confirm this. If so, in what > manner? > > Did you find anything which implies that SVG alters the font matching > algorithm? > No. I observed that if the CSS matching algorithm is not altered, then (assuming the user has local fonts with broad Unicode coverage) the 'missing-glyph' from an SVG font is very unlikely to ever be used, so the feature has very little value. I also noticed that Opera uses the missing-glyph when an SVG Font is specified in 'family-name', without performing CSS font matching, so I thought perhaps I'd missed something in the spec. Also, Alex thought the use of 'missing-glyph' would prevent the confusion over coordinate systems that I mentioned. But given CSS font matching will be performed, it actually won't make any difference. Rob -- "He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah 53:5-6]
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 21:53:16 UTC