From: fantasai (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Mar 13 2006 - 17:08:41 CST
> fantasai <firstname.lastname@example.org>さん：
>>In that case should the W3C CSS3 Text spec recommend the use of U+FE45
>>for emphasis marks?
> It is another "chicken and egg" problem.
> If Japanese market **implicit** requirement is so strong and W3C will
> support the use of SEASAME DOT, it encourage or enforce Japanese font
> vendors to support SEASAME DOT fonts :-)
CSS has a font fallback mechanism, so as long as there is at least one
font that has the glyph, the character can be displayed. An application
could even ship with its own font that consists only of the glyphs it
needs for text-emphasis, so that even if there are no fonts on the system
that have the glyph, it can still be rendered.
So the chicken and egg problem is not a problem. :) What is a problem is
knowing enough to specify what the application must do with the glyph in
the font, assuming it has one.
BTW -- what happens if the emphasized word also has ruby?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Mar 13 2006 - 17:10:54 CST