On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 01:51:57PM -0800, Bill Janssen wrote: > Yes, but... > > You'll notice that we don't really have the notion of BOLD -- we only > have a font style. Our font support is already suboptimal, and I don't > see the problem with adding more suboptimality.
That is one thing that has bugged me quite a bit. Bold fonts should be
a tag like italics. But that's for another thread :)
> It seems to me the viewer already needs font-untangling code, and this
> would be a relatively minor change to it.
The only problem with setting sub/super script as a font is that you
have to 'hard-code' the actual font-face value. For example:
<h1>H<sub>2</sub>O</h1>
Would look like:
** ** ***
** ** ** **
***** ** **
** ** ** **
** ** 2 ***
If sub/super script were a function then we'd more accuratly reproduce
** ** ***
** ** ** **
***** *** ** **
** ** ** ** ** **
** ** ** ***
**
*****
--
Adam McDaniel
Array.org
Calgary, AB, Canada
msg03948/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
