Re: [gentoo-user] Browsers not seeing symbol font

[Mike Kazantsev <mike_kazantsev@fraggod.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1026 bytes --]

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:38:31 -0700
"Kevin O'Gorman" <kogorman@gmail.com> wrote:

>> 2. Character encodings are easy: use Unicode. :)
>> http://www.unicode.org/charts/symbols.html  
>
> Yes they're easy.  My question is about whether they have any effect
> on use of Symbol  So far I see no evidence of it.

They shouldn't, since such fonts' glyphs aren't aligned with any
encoding afaik - it'd be rubbish, at best.


> It works in MS Works, Dreamweaver and on Gentoo, in OpenOffice.

Well, it also works for me, if I change 'Symbol' to 'Luxi Mono', for
example, which is a valid font name on my system.

Since handling of such stuff as font-family is defined by browser, it's
at best unwise to rely on 'Symbol' font definition, and, while IE6 is
still around, even more so.

You can use any decent font-rendering library to make
browser-independent representation of such stuff, which is probably the
only solution if you care whether end-user can see it or not.

-- 
Mike Kazantsev // fraggod.net

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]