With that said, this type of "bug" is actually by design for many languages
that have speakers who are not using Unicode. When you look (for example) at
Indic languages on the web, the vast majority of them are handled by this
type font hack.
So I am hesitant to call it a BUG. Its just the encoding that people will
It would be nice to move them to Unicode, sure. But with (again, for
example) most of the folks at tamil.net using Windows and then with less
than 5% of them using Windows 2000, they certainly cannot see Unicode as
their best option at this point.
Looking forward they know its where they want to be, but for now they are
fairly embedded in TSCII (or TAB) at best, random font hacks at worst.
Trigeminal Software, Inc.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yung-Fong Tang" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Unicode List" <email@example.com>
Cc: "Unicode List" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: relation between unicode and font
> Not really a browser bug. It is a bug in the FONT. Some of the font
> basically claim they are design for a certain encoding which 0x00-0x7F
> represent ASCII while the glyph in that font in those position have
> shape in non ASCII. If font author *lie* to browser, in the information
> which encoded in the font, there are no thing the browser (or browser
> developer) can do.
> Jukka.Korpela@hut.fi wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, sreekant wrote:
> >> <font face="Tikkana">A B </font> is being shown as some telugu
> >> characters.
> > That's basically a browser bug, though some people have seen it
> > as a method of extending character repertoire. It has absolutely
> > nothing to do with Unicode. For an explanation of the fallacy, see
> > http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.uk/%7eflavell/charset/fontface-harmful.html
> > http://babel.alis.com/web_ml/html/fontface.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:17 EDT