From: Erik van der Poel (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Apr 25 2005 - 11:25:36 CST
James Kass wrote:
> The second factor is that the STYLE sheet used with many of the
> "What is Unicode?" pages forces some browsers to use inappropriate
> fonts. If the selected fonts don't cover the Unicode range of the
> text itself, it isn't surprising that the text doesn't display.
In theory, the text should be displayed no matter what fonts are
specified in the style sheets. If I recall correctly, the CSS spec says
that the browser should try the fonts listed in the property in the
order found there, and may then fall back to other fonts in the system.
Of course, this means that the browser must check each font to see which
Unicodes can be displayed. In practice, some of the browsers and fonts
> In the case of this Deseret page, the first choice for fonts in various
> sections is either "Arial" or "Century Schoolbook", neither of which
> cover Deseret. Opening the file "standard_styles.css" and changing
> the font names to something appropriate will enable the page to
> Similar display problems exist with the recently added Ethiopic script
> pages. All of the Unicode 4.1 characters display as "missing glyph"
> boxes here, even though I have an appropriate font installed.
Which browser? Are any of those 4.1 characters on the Web somewhere?
What font are you referring to?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 25 2005 - 11:26:55 CST