From: Mark E. Shoulson (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Jun 10 2005 - 12:47:54 CDT
Chris Jacobs wrote:
>>Which takes precedence in such a situation, the ligature formation
>>to display the language correctly or the color change specified by the
>Neither I think.
>If the HTML requires a multicolor ligature and the font does not have that
>multicolor ligature glyph,
>then I would expect the rectangular 'missing glyph' symbol.
Similar questions apply to other <span>-formed effects (and the like).
What about a ligature (or some Korean jamos, for that matter) where one
character is bold and one plain? One italic and one upright? One in
48-point type and one in 5-point? It's probably up to the programmer to
deal with such things, but my gut feeling is that if it's something
truly bizarre like the above, and there's no simple way to cope with it,
using the unjoined characters is a better idea than a missing glyph.
Certainly this is the case if we're talking about a ligature like Latin
"fi". It's less clear if we're dealing with mandatory joining like in
Arabic, but I suspect that even in Arabic it's better to see both
characters there, unjoined in all their typographical hideousness, than
to have nothing at all (but a "missing character" box) to read.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 10 2005 - 12:48:59 CDT