Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Typography/Unicode: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
DragonHawk (talk | contribs) →Hex prefix: re - didn't realize you cared that much; U+ seems reasonable |
DragonHawk (talk | contribs) →Font choice: request clarification, CSS/HTML, or glyph images? |
||
Line 42:
In addition, there is the problem of choosing a font. Some Unicode characters are so obscure that probably nobody would know whether they had been rendered using Bitstream Vera Serif or Century Schoolbook L, but a standard for describing Unicode characters must deal in a reasonable way with all Unicode characters, not just the obscure ones. I suggest that the default font for displaying a Unicode character should be the [[FreeSerif]] font distributed with OpenOffice. It seems to match the images published in the Unicode standard reasonably well, and it contains quite a lot of characters. Of course, for the obscure characters we are lucky to find any font which contains the character; I am only suggesting that [[FreeSerif]] be the display font when it is a reasonable choice. [[User:John Sauter|John Sauter]] ([[User talk:John Sauter|talk]]) 05:07, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
:Just to be clear, here: Are you referring to the font specified in CSS for rendering literal Unicode characters from the HTML from Wikipedia, or are you referring to the font we should use to render the sample glyph images? —<small>[[User:DragonHawk|DragonHawk]] ([[User talk:DragonHawk|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/DragonHawk|hist]])</small> 12:03, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
| |||