From: Mark E. Shoulson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Nov 23 2005 - 16:36:09 CST
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