Re: ISO 15924: Different Arabic scripts?

From: Mark E. Shoulson (
Date: Wed Nov 23 2005 - 16:36:09 CST

  • Next message: Mark Davis: "Re: How many characters?"

    It would seem this works well, but shouldn't really be necessary. There
    are other standards at hand for defining which typeface a page should
    show in. Maybe it would be nice if font information were sufficiently
    rich that a stylesheet can specify "Nastaleeq" or something and the
    browser would be able to find one that satisfies.

    This isn't to say that Hans vs Hant is not a distinction worth making.
    This and the Roman/Fraktur distinction is there because librarians and
    bibliographers have been using it for a while. There are going to be
    arguments and debates over what counts as a font-choice and what counts
    as a separate script--as we're seeing now. But there *are* some cases
    that are just font-choices.


    Simon Montagu wrote:

    > Andreas Prilop wrote:
    >> When an HTML document is encoded in UTF-8, we can specify only
    >> by lang=zh-CN or lang=zh-TW
    >> whether a program should display it in Simplified or
    >> Traditional Chinese typeface. Mozilla-based browsers do this.
    >> A better, more logical way is by
    >> lang=zh-Hans or lang=zh-Hant
    >> I'm not sure whether the latest Mozilla browsers already
    >> support this.
    > They support both ways.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 23 2005 - 16:37:48 CST