From: Jungshik Shin (jshin@mailaps.org)
Date: Tue Dec 23 2003 - 02:52:17 EST
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Alan Wood wrote:
> Lill Therese wrote:
>> We are developing a website that will include (at least) the following
>> languages: Russian, persian, somali, kurdish, norwegian, arabic, urdu
>> and english.
....
>> all the characters we need. But does anyone have a list of which font is
>> prefered for each language? I've been told that Tahoma is the prefered font
> It is not normally a good idea to specify named fonts in your HTML or CSS.
I have a bit different opinion.
> People who want to read the version of your site in a particular language
> will already have a suitable font installed, and will have their browser
> configured to use it.
Well, I don't think that's always the case. Some people need some
help in selecting fonts necessary to view web pages of their interest.
> They will not appreciate you trying to force them to
> view your site in a different font.
Most major browsers (if not all) offer a way or two to override
author-specified fonts (and other style specifications) with the
client-side setting.
> If you specify a font by name, there is no guarantee that everyone will have
> the same version installed. For example, old Windows versions of Arial, and
> all Mac versions of Arial, do not contain Cyrillic characters.
You're for sure right. However, if your browser follows the CSS
font resolution mechanism, it shouldn't be a problem as long as you
specify a list of fonts with the CSS generic fonts at the end. That is,
lists like 'fontA, fontB, fontC, ...., serif' or 'fontA, fontB, fontC,
...., sans-serif' should be fine. 'as long as ....' part is important
and is often overlooked by web developers. And, if you specify CJK fonts,
you have to make sure that font names are specified twice once in CJK
native scripts (Chinese, Japanese and Korean) and once in English.
Jungshik
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 23 2003 - 03:39:07 EST