Aman Here in Bhutan the Internet connection is still much worse than in most places I've visited in India & Nepal (and the cost per minute is several times higher) - believe me even then UTF-8 (or UTF-16) encoded pages do not display noticeably slower than ASCII, ISCII or 8-bit font encoded pages - and I don't need to download any special plug-ins or fonts.
- Chris -- Christopher J Fynn Thimphu, Bhutan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Aman Chawla > Sent: 21 January 2002 10:57 > To: James Kass; Unicode > Subject: Re: Devanagari > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Kass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Aman Chawla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Unicode" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 12:46 AM > Subject: Re: Devanagari > > > > 25% may not be 300%, but it isn't insignificant. As you note, if the > > mark-up were removed from both of those files, the percentage of > > increase would be slightly higher. But, as connection speeds continue > > to improve, these differences are becoming almost minuscule. > > With regards to South Asia, where the most widely used modems are > approx. 14 > kbps, maybe some 36 kbps and rarely 56 kbps, where broadband/DSL is mostly > unheard of, efficiency in data transmission is of paramount importance... > how can we convince the south asian user to create websites in an encoding > that would make his client's 14 kbps modem as effective (rather, > ineffective) as a 4.6 kbps modem? >
