From: "Vladimir Ivanov" <iranorus@online.ru>
> Chris Pratley wrote:
>
> > Please note that my personal recommendation is to use specific fonts
> >appropriate for the scripts you are supporting, rather than relying on a
> >"universal" font, which is always going to be compromised
typographically.
>
> Those who develop data bases on oriental and African languages using MS
> Access have no other way out. The fields in records do not support various
> fonts at one time (as far I could understand), so they must rely only on
one
> universal font regardless of typography.
While this may be true, I also find the number of times that one would have
such a database which was:
a) multilingual
b) cross-script
c) plain text (versus RTF which would allow lanuage tagging)
d) no language tagging of any sort to mark script type per row level entry
e) mix of (a) and (b) within a single column
f) none of the scripts in question can be handled by [Uniscribe-ish] font
linking in Access
g) none of the scripts are helped by Access's own font fallback
is not exceedingly common, at all. Chris Pratley's recomendation stands most
of the time, just in terms of real-world usage.
MichKa
Michael Kaplan
Trigeminal Software, Inc.
http://www.trigeminal.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Oct 18 2001 - 06:19:05 EDT