For Korean fonts, 10pt is sufficient. For Traditional Chinese, 12pt may be
Of course they need to be optimized for that point size.
From: A. Vine [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 5:00 PM
To: Unicode List
Cc: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: Generic Unicode font handling
Michael Kaplan wrote:
> Well, I can state from experience with the FE market, if you do not have 9
pt fonts, you may as well
> save yourself the trouble of localizing into their language. And I do not
blame them, considering
> the complexity of the glyphs.
> An easy workaround is to use 9 pt across the board, then everyone is
happy. You can use 9 pt MS Sans
> and all will be displayed.
> Note that other fonts like Tahoma (world-wide except for FE) and Arial
Unicode (world-wide, no
> exceptions) are considered to be ugly at 9 pt in some languages by design
folks (I don't mind 9 pt
> Tahoma much myself, and I have never heard of a product's sales being
affected by that the same way
> it will be affected in the FE markets to shrink their glyphs down to
> So, to recap: 9 pt MS Sans everyhere, then use the earlier stated
guidelines for what order to
> localize with so you cn resize controls appropriately before most
localizers have to worry about it
> (easy if you pick your pilot languages carefully).
Admittedly I haven't tried this, but 9pt sounds _exceptionally_ small. I
even use it in English. The online font settings I use (on Solaris/CDE) are
usually 12pt. Is there some difference in display on the PC? Is there
else who can attest to 9pt for Asian language characters?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:56 EDT