In an ideal world, there should exist no font that assigns the .notdef
glyph to any valid Unicode code point (or to any valid sequence of
Unicode code points that has been mapped with GSUB/GPOS OpenType
features).
But given that such fonts do exist (and often cannot be legally
modified), the best
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Marc Durdin
marc.dur...@tavultesoft.com wrote:
Doug Ewell doug at ewellic dot org wrote:
I suspect that in the real world, the problem of no support vs.
any support at all is more common and has greater ramifications than
the quality of support. Couple that
Hi, Andrew,
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 12:17 AM, Andrew Cunningham
lang.supp...@gmail.com wrote:
hi Ed,
On 22 June 2010 11:51, Ed Trager ed.tra...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Andrew! I like Keith's approach.
I have been looking at Lanna a little bit and I am not sure if *any*
OS shaper
Ed Trager wrote:
In the latest release we cut this support load dramatically by including a
licensed private version of
usp10.dll (Uniscribe shaping engine) along with a management program that
dynamically loads and
translates calls from the system usp10 to our private one for consistent
- For Japanese and Hangul scripts at least, you may detect the
difference of widths between wide and narrow versions of the same
character (I think that almost all of these fonts support both
versions simultaneously, but I may be wrong).
- For Simplified Chinese fonts, you may try to detect the
Thanks, Andrew! I like Keith's approach.
I have been looking at Lanna a little bit and I am not sure if *any*
OS shaper currently really has fully implemented correct shaping
support for Lanna? In any event, Lanna is quite similar to Myanmar,
so Keith's approach could be used very successfully.
hi Ed,
On 22 June 2010 11:51, Ed Trager ed.tra...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Andrew! I like Keith's approach.
I have been looking at Lanna a little bit and I am not sure if *any*
OS shaper currently really has fully implemented correct shaping
support for Lanna? In any event, Lanna is quite
it is an issue that we've struggled with for a while
eot, ttf font linking, woff and svg fonts all play a part in a
possible solution.
for my projects i also have to consider if clients are likely to be
using older operating systems, and thus may not have rendering
support.
SO detecting if
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 03:51:37PM +1000, Marc Durdin wrote:
I'd love to see that in Javascript. Of course then you need to know if it
will shape correctly as well for it to be useful to the end user. Dotted
circles are only marginally better than square boxes. And that's a much
harder
Ed Trager:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Marc Durdin
P { font-family: Code2000, MyCode2000; }
@font-face { font-family: MyCode2000; src: url('code2000.ttf'); }
P { font-family: MyCode2000; }
@font-face { font-family: MyCode2000; src: local(Code2000),
url('code2000.ttf'); }
(…)
Marc Durdin marc dot durdin at tavultesoft dot com wrote:
I'd love to see that in Javascript. Of course then you need to know
if it will shape correctly as well for it to be useful to the end
user. Dotted circles are only marginally better than square boxes.
And that's a much harder
On 17 June 2010 06:51, Marc Durdin marc.dur...@tavultesoft.com wrote:
I'd love to see that in Javascript. Of course then you need to know if it
will shape correctly as well for it to be useful to the end user. Dotted
circles are only marginally better than square boxes. And that's a much
If I’m not mistaken it should work, in theory at least, to put a generic font
family (i.e. ‘serif’,
‘sans-serif’ etc.) _before_ your virtual font in the ‘font-family’
declaration. Many user
agents can be set up to use a specific font per script (or codepage) for each
generic
family (or
Doug Ewell doug at ewellic dot org wrote:
I suspect that in the real world, the problem of no support vs.
any support at all is more common and has greater ramifications than
the quality of support. Couple that with how hard the quality
question is to answer, and this becomes a matter of
I would have thought that putting your font last in the css list would be
enough, so it only uses it if the other fonts don't have the needed character.
But now that “good” browsers support @font-face, we can envision a
better solution: If the browser does not have a font for rendering a
to Detect Script Support in a Browser
Hi Unicoders,
Suppose that we write Unicode text in a web page that we create. We
are worried that our viewers' computers lack a font for proper display
of the script in which our text is written. Obviously it will not be
good if our users only see square
It would be really nice if there were a way to just query the darned
rendering engine as to whether it can render character U+ at all, as
opposed to displaying a .notdef glyph. Anything beyond that would be a
bonus.
--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
RFC
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:15:05PM -0600, Doug Ewell wrote:
It would be really nice if there were a way to just query the darned
rendering engine as to whether it can render character U+ at all, as
opposed to displaying a .notdef glyph. Anything beyond that would be a
bonus.
It would
-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] On Behalf
Of Doug Ewell
Sent: Thursday, 17 June 2010 3:15 PM
To: Unicode Mailing List
Subject: Re: Using Javascript to Detect Script Support in a Browser
It would be really nice if there were a way to just query the darned
rendering engine
Javascript code.
Marc
-Original Message-
From: unicode-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] On Behalf
Of Ed Trager
Sent: Wednesday, 16 June 2010 4:14 AM
To: Unicode Mailing List
Subject: Using Javascript to Detect Script Support in a Browser
Hi Unicoders,
Suppose that we write
Use a font with only one character, U+FFFE with a glyph of known width in
displaying the measuring divs. The font may be specified using @font-face
for these divs.
Cibu
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Ed Trager ed.tra...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Unicoders,
Suppose that we write Unicode text in
21 matches
Mail list logo
