Re: glyph selection for Unicode in browsers

From: Tex Texin (
Date: Fri Sep 27 2002 - 11:22:18 EDT

  • Next message: William Overington: "Re: Keys. (derives from Re: Sequences of combining characters.)"

    John Cowan wrote:
    > Tex Texin scripsit:
    > > An author of a primarily Japanese document could choose not to tag
    > > Chinese text as Chinese, and so get a Japanese rendering of the text,
    > > but that could hurt search engines or other applications that use
    > > language tags for purposes other than rendering...
    > Indeed, indeed. Tagging (even implicit tagging) with a false language is
    > a very bad idea.
    > > So I stick with the
    > > idea that text should be tagged with language appropriately, and a user
    > > that reads Japanese and prefers to see Chinese text with Japanese glyphs
    > > have the ability to override the language tags to affect rendering.
    > The trouble is that that's the default for a Japanese reader reading
    > mixed-language text. No override should be required.

    It's not a big trouble. browsers already have options such as netscape's
    preferences under fonts, radio button:
    use fonts specified in document vs. override and use user-defined fonts.

    > > I can't say if "typographical tradition preference" (TTP) is the correct
    > > term for "language preference". (I figure I got into enough trouble
    > > using "typographically correct".) I hope the discussion above was clear
    > > enough. I'll let others comment on TTP, and if there is general
    > > agreement that it is a better and more precise and accurate term, I am
    > > fine with it.
    > My point was that it's one thing to want Chinese text displayed with
    > Japanese glyphs, based on a typographical-tradition preference, and it's
    > another thing to want the text in a Japanese-language version,
    > which is what setting a "language preference" would suggest.
    > > I am not familiar enough with Fraktur and Antiqua to
    > > knowledgably comment. From what little I do know this seems to require
    > > more than language information to decide between them.
    > Absolutely. The analogy is that Fraktur is quite, or nearly, illegible if
    > all you know how to read is Antiqua (which looks like what you are seeing
    > now, ordinary Latin-script type). This makes the difference greater than a
    > mere font difference.

    ok, but it is not clear to me that we should try to fix this problem in
    the same way we fix the cjk rendering problem.
    Language is being tagged and provided for a number of reasons, and it
    should be utilized.
    Fraktur/Antiqua and other distinctions might need a different mechanism.


    > --
    > Business before pleasure, if not too bloomering long before.
    > --Nicholas van Rijn
    > John Cowan <>

    Tex Texin   cell: +1 781 789 1898
    Xen Master                
    Making e-Business Work Around the World

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Sep 27 2002 - 12:11:38 EDT