I don't think you will be able to convince anyone that the original version of Windows 95 that you are using is a stable platform. I wouldn't agree at least, and I wrote parts of it.
Regards, - Michael > -----Original Message----- > From: Doug Ewell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 4:32 PM > To: Michael Jansson; 'Michael (michka) Kaplan' > Cc: Unicode List > Subject: Re: Unicode Devanagari Font in Mozilla > > > Michael Jansson <mjan at em2 dash solutions dot com> wrote: > > > Giving advice to people that they should go ahead and update their > > Win9x machines with Uniscribe is plain unethical. It's not tested on > > Win9x. There are known issues when doing that. Telling people to > > download and install fonts, that may or may not have been tested on > > all platforms, is equally unethical. period. > > My Windows 95 machine displays Unicode text *substantially* > better with > Uniscribe than it did without. Not only glyph support, but RTL and > Arabic shaping work well -- something I was once told couldn't be done > with Win95. In fact, the only significant problem I have had, apart > from missing glyphs for certain scripts and characters, was with the > Hawaiian Web-font example that Michael Jansson asked me to try. > > -Doug Ewell > Fullerton, California >
