> At 2:43 pm +0100 7/12/03, Peter Jacobi wrote: > > >Then you consider > > <span style='color:#00f'>ல</span>ொ > >to be valid input, which ideally should render as intended? > > I have uploaded a valid page to > > <http://bd8.com/temp/tamil_unicode_tscii.html> > > where you should see the lo properly displayed (in the second case). > As to the TSCII stuff I have simply followed your encodings, which > seem to give different glyphs, but maybe the first font in my list > (MylaiTSC) is encoded differently -- so much for unregistered legacy > encodings. > > >Then you consider > > <span style='color:#00f'>ல</span>ொ > >to be valid input, which ideally should render as intended? > > In your TSCII version you write > §<span>Ä</span>¡ > > is that not equivalent to Unicode > > ெ<span>ல</span>ா > > >>From a processing point of view, it is somehwat challenging, as you > >may have to parse through lots of markup, until you know what to do > >with the 0BB2. > > That seems fairly easy. I must be missing the point. > > >As I've understood from other posts, the font support for > >all this is theoretically available, but not often done in practice. > > For Windows browsers I find I have to specify a Unicode font (in this > case Arial Unicode MS) in order for pages to display properly without > the user fiddling with his browser preferences. As I said I have > WinNT 4.0 so maybe this has changed now. The Mac browsers (Safari, > OmniWeb) require no font to be specified and will display the correct > characters no matter what the user's defaults. I have nothing to do > with Mozilla. > > JD > > > >
-- +++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++ Neu: Preissenkung für MMS und FreeMMS! http://www.gmx.net
