From: Tex Texin (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Nov 09 2009 - 00:06:00 CST
Yes generic font names have not been implemented as spec'd.
There are various workarounds or techniques on each platform for solving the problem, but they are not well known, well documented, and in some cases don't work all that well.
We should push to fix this.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 9:03 PM
To: Unicode Mailing List
Tex Texin <textexin at xencraft dot com> wrote:
> As an advanced feature for those requiring or preferring to give
> special attention to how their text looks, of course it should be
> possible to look thru fonts and optimize results.
> However, that should not be the requirement. There should be a default
> font set on every platform (not necessarily the same on every
> platform) and enabling technology which ensures that valid characters
> are rendered, even if non-optimally.
> There should be a way to express (or to fall back to) a "just render
> it" font...
> That doesn't seem like a lot to ask.
> Html already has a way to express this with its generic font names.
Solutions may be in the works for Web applications, such as Michael
D'Errico's calculator, but there are other scenarios. The developer who
builds a desktop application still has to specify the (one) font in
which each label is to be displayed, or accept the (one) default font
suggested by the development framework or OS. Non-Web applications are
still a vital part of the computing experience.
In any event, the ability to use generic font names in HTML doesn't seem
to have helped Michael display a cube root symbol reliably.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 09 2009 - 00:08:35 CST