Re: [css3-fonts] unicode-range and unicode normalization
Thomas Phinney <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.css.general,gmane.comp.web.fonts |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 3:43 PM, timeless <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 6:06 AM, John Daggett <[email protected]> wrote: >>> This starts to push into the realm of saving users from themselves. In >>> general, I don't think we should burden implementations with complex >>> error handling requirements like this unless it's really a common >>> occurrence that's hard for the author to work around. >> >> Do you mean something like the Font Problems that Fedora has: >> http://ianweller.org/2010/07/12/another-double-post-fedoras-fonts-and-more-datanommer/ >> >> It seems they're shopping for a replacement, but I'm more interested in today. > > I don't think that's what's being talked about here. > > It appears that Fedora's problem is simply that their font doesn't > have accented characters at all. fantasai and jdaggett are talking > about a specific problem where a composed glyph crosses element > boundaries. Agreed. The font doesn't support the characters they need, so they're looking at other fonts. Different case. T