Thanks to Arash and Omid for your responses. I would love to get
this working...

> dependent, not because it is too complicated, but because the font
> doesn't allow embeding.
I also think so and although Weft tells you whether embedding is
"permissible" for each font on your webpage, it doesn't state
if the vendor of the font has disabled embedding intentionally
or just inadvertantly caused it. I see that some fonts simply
don't embed at all, while others (Nazanin) embed but end up
looking different than normal while others  (Koodak) do work ok.

In any case, I have written to the developer and I'll post any
info I get in case others are interested.
Besides Weft, I've also discovered another commercial product
which is advertised as being better than Weft:

> But is the WEFT way really necessary today? Or is it because of the
> different shapes that you need to use WEFT?
Well, the target users of my webpage will be people who don't have
any Persian fonts on their computer and can not/will not install one so
they will end up seeing my page in (some version of)Times New Roman.
the not-as-nice appearance of TimesNR, the character "heh + yeh"
seems to come out as "ta marbuta".

In case anyone doesn't know, there is also a way to embed fonts in Word
docs (Word2002 and some earlier versions): Tools-->options-->save-->embed
true type fonts. This is a convenient way to check if fonts are embeddable
without having to use Weft which takes a little more time/trouble.

FarsiWeb mailing list

Reply via email to