Revision as of 04:27, 1 February 2005 edit Mzajac (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users 66,545 edits →"IE5 was the first to use glyphs from 'best available' fonts" ← Previous edit		Revision as of 06:17, 1 February 2005 edit undo Mjb (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 10,716 edits →"IE5 was the first to use glyphs from 'best available' fonts": let's ditch the browser comparisons altogether Next edit →
Line 81: ::MSIE 6 is ahead of Netscape 4, in that it can display Unicode from multiple encodings on one page. But I have yet to see any instance where it chooses a font other than what is specified in a web page (in very little testing, I admit). I'm curious to know how the font linking works. But in the mean time, in terms of multi-Unicode block display, it's the one browser that I have to do extra work for (as it also is in terms of CSS rendering). ''—[[User:Mzajac \|Michael]] [[User talk:Mzajac \|Z.]] <small>2005-02-1 04:27 Z</small>'' ::: Unicode from multiple scripts (writing systems), you mean. Yes, I am curious about it, too. Like I said, "works for me," but I do have Japanese lanaguage support installed. (Control Panel > Regional and Language Options > Languages > Install files for East Asian Languages). ::: The "Romanj" (''romaji'', I think it's supposed to be… I'm sure there are better example pages out there) lines are using characters from the CJK Fullwidth Forms (U+FF01 to U+FFE5 or so), which are in the [[Adobe Glyph List]]. You would think that it is therefore likely that you'd have a font that supports them, but perhaps not. It is possible that you don't, and Firefox is instead "cheating" by substituting glyphs that in the font files are actually mapped to the Latin-1 range. ::: For purposes of the article, I think we should stop naming and comparing browsers entirely, so as to avoid getting further into advocacy / POV issues, and also because statements about current capabilities of popular browsers do not have much of a shelf life in general. Instead, I think we should just acknowledge that simultaneous display of characters from different scripts is dependent upon the user's installed fonts, and is subject to other technological limitations (e.g., console-based browsers don't even have access to fonts), so naturally, browsers, including the most popular ones, will almost inevitably have varying levels of support for it. - [[User:Mjb\|mjb]] 06:17, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Unicode and HTML: Difference between revisions