From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Tue Dec 09 2003 - 09:18:51 EST
On 09/12/2003 05:13, jon@hackcraft.net wrote:
>>So, let's get this clear. Within an XML or HTML document, if I want an e
>>with a red acute accent on it, it is quite permissible to write:
>>
>>e<span class="red-text">{U+0301}</span>
>>
>>where {U+0301} is replaced by the actual Unicode character, and
>>"red-text" is defined in the stylesheet. So it is not a problem that
>>there is a defective combining sequence, nor that the accent is not
>>combined with the e as it would be in NFC. Is that correct?
>>
>>
>
>You can, whether you should is another thing, and whether it would render
>correctly yet another.
>
>
>
>
Well, users need to know whether they should do this, or what else they
should do, when this is the effect they require; and implementers need
to know whether they should work towards making this render correctly,
to meet the demands of users including the Tamil users in question.
It seems that this is the simple and meaningful way of specifying the
effect that it required. Rendering this is of course a challenge, but at
least the requirement is clear.
Your alternative suggestion using svg seemed to require the user to
handle the details of glyph positioning with specified horizontal
advances, which is surely a very strange requirement. Or maybe I have
misunderstood what was going on here.
-- Peter Kirk peter@qaya.org (personal) peterkirk@qaya.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 10:05:53 EST