Firefox problem - CSS vs FONT FACE

There is a page that shows Firefox 1.0 render text differently for CSS
as compared to FONT FACE for one particular font:
http://www.aczoom.com/fonts/xdvng.ttf is the font that does not work.

http://www.aczoom.com/isongs/0/t_ff.html
is the test page - that has shows the line "This is using CSS to
specify xdvng:" show up with the default english font instead of
xdvng.

Internet Explorer works as expected - both CSS and FONT FACE use of
xdvng displays identical text.

I am not sure if I should submit this as a bug for firefox, or if this
has something to do with the xdvng font?

Hi,

you should read the FAQ for this list. (http://css.nu/faq/ciwas-aFAQ.html)

Chris

B Wooster wrote:

There is a page that shows Firefox 1.0 render text differently for CSS
as compared to FONT FACE for one particular font:
http://www.aczoom.com/fonts/xdvng.ttf is the font that does not work.

http://www.aczoom.com/isongs/0/t_ff.html
is the test page - that has shows the line "This is using CSS to
specify xdvng:" show up with the default english font instead of
xdvng.

Internet Explorer works as expected - both CSS and FONT FACE use of
xdvng displays identical text.

I am not sure if I should submit this as a bug for firefox, or if this
has something to do with the xdvng font?

Chris Leipold <cleipold (AT) dietzk (DOT) de> wrote

you should read the FAQ for this list. (http://css.nu/faq/ciwas-aFAQ.html)
Chris

I did read the FAQs, re-read the page you mention - but I am not sure
what
you think in there applies to my question.

The question simply is this: take any browser, and text defined using
CSS and font-family, and alternately FONT FACE HTML tag.
Should they render differently?

Firefox renders that text differently.

I am not sure if I should submit this as a bug for firefox, or if this
has something to do with the xdvng font - in which case I will enter a
bug report for firefox.
On the other hand, if there is a reason why a CSS font-family can
safely
ignore a font that exists on the system, it is not a bug in firefox -
but
I would like to understand why!

B Wooster wrote:

There is a page that shows Firefox 1.0 render text differently for CSS
as compared to FONT FACE for one particular font:
http://www.aczoom.com/fonts/xdvng.ttf is the font that does not work.

http://www.aczoom.com/isongs/0/t_ff.html
is the test page - that has shows the line "This is using CSS to
specify xdvng:".....

On 10 Nov 2004 10:16:35 -0800, B Wooster wrote:

Chris Leipold <cleipold (AT) dietzk (DOT) de> wrote

you should read the FAQ for this list. (http://css.nu/faq/ciwas-aFAQ.html)
Chris

I did read the FAQs, re-read the page you mention - but I am not sure
what
you think in there applies to my question.

Chris may well have been thinking of this (very important) section..
<http://css.nu/faq/ciwas-aFAQ.html#QA11>

Which soon leads one to..
<http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aczoom.com%2Fisongs%2F0 %2Ft_ff.html&charset=iso-8859-1+%28Western+Europe%29>

HTH

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help
http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite
http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology
http://www.LensEscapes.com/ Images that escape the mundane

Andrew Thompson <SeeMySites (AT) www (DOT) invalid> wrote

On 10 Nov 2004 10:16:35 -0800, B Wooster wrote:

Chris may well have been thinking of this (very important) section..
http://css.nu/faq/ciwas-aFAQ.html#QA11
Which soon leads one to..
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...tern+Europe%29
HTH

Fair enough, though all the reported errors are in a later section of
the document, not in the part where I had the example with the
problem. Here's another page that has only the minimal text to show
the CSS vs FONT FACE difference (only a problem on Firefox, works ok
on atleast Internet Explorer - if someone with Opera or Safari can
tell me if the page works correctly on their browsers, would
appreciate it - page to test:
http://www.aczoom.com/isongs/0/ff.html

and a validator URL (also followed the CSS validation - no warnings,
no errors):

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=ht...tern+Europe%29

B Wooster <bwooster47 (AT) gmail (DOT) com>:

the CSS vs FONT FACE difference (only a problem on Firefox, works ok
on atleast Internet Explorer - if someone with Opera or Safari can
tell me if the page works correctly on their browsers,

OperaÂ*7, which is available in a free ad-sponsored version, does show
"English" letters everywhere. I don't have a font called "xdvng"
installed, but do have some fonts featuring the Devanagari alphabet (Arial
Unicode MS, Mangal, Titus Cyberbit Basic). (The cryptic font name and the
keyword "Hindi" tell me that that script is wanted.)

http://www.aczoom.com/isongs/0/ff.html

Your concept is broken.¹ Devanagari is in the Unicode range U+0900-097F
(dec. 2304-2431, not all used). Use those characters, either with UTF-8
(अ) or numeric character references (&#x0905;, अ). Everything else
is just hackerish and not guaranteed to work---as you have already
encountered the hard way.

I think Alan J. Flavell (<http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.uk/~flavell/charset/>)
and Jukka Korpela (<http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/chars.html>) have
some pages on that issue (not focussed on mixed Hindi and English texts,
though).

____
¹ I know that several groups have been using something like this for years
nevertheless, because nothing else worked at all.

--
"Not all chemicals are bad. Without chemicals such as hydrogen and oxygen,
for example, there would be no way to make water, a vital ingredient in beer."
Dave Barry

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 05:32:43 +0100, Christoph Paeper
<christoph.paeper (AT) nurfuerspam (DOT) de> wrote:

...

http://www.aczoom.com/isongs/0/ff.html

Your concept is broken.¹
...
____
¹ I know that several groups have been using something like this for
years nevertheless, because nothing else worked at all.

A large number of Indian websites still this broken concept

--
Rijk van Geijtenbeek

The Web is a procrastination apparatus:
It can absorb as much time as is required to ensure that you
won't get any real work done. - J.Nielsen

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Christoph Paeper wrote:

http://www.aczoom.com/isongs/0/ff.html

Your concept is broken.

Absolutely!

I think Alan J. Flavell (<http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.uk/~flavell/charset/>)
and Jukka Korpela (<http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/chars.html>) have
some pages on that issue (not focussed on mixed Hindi and English texts,
though).

For Devanagari text, see
<http://www.unics.uni-hannover.de/nhtcapri/multilingual1.html#nagari>
<http://www.unics.uni-hannover.de/nhtcapri/multilingual2.html#nagari>
<http://www.unics.uni-hannover.de/nhtcapri/urdu-alphabet.html>
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/hindi/>

On 10 Nov 2004, B Wooster wrote:

I am not sure if I should submit this as a bug for firefox, or if this
has something to do with the xdvng font - in which case I will enter a
bug report for firefox.

File a bug report for the nonsense font xdvng - better yet trash
xdvng immediately and forget about it!
Read
<http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Indic-Fonts-HOWTO/>
<http://www.unicode.org/faq/indic.html>
<http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otfntdev/indicot/>
<http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=20891>
to learn about Indic fonts.

Christoph Paeper <christoph.paeper (AT) nurfuerspam (DOT) de> wrote

B Wooster <bwooster47 (AT) gmail (DOT) com>:

http://www.aczoom.com/isongs/0/ff.html

Your concept is broken.¹ Devanagari is in the Unicode range U+0900-097F

I think Alan J. Flavell (<http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.uk/~flavell/charset/>)
and Jukka Korpela (<http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/chars.html>) have

I am quite familiar with Alan's great docs, but my question was much
simpler!
I can understand (as Alan explains) if a Browser enforces character
encodings, etc.

But - let's ignore non-ASCII characters, using Latin1 encoding.
And the system has the xdvng font installed, and that font is
advertised as a Latin1 font.
Now, if I have a word "abcd" and I use FONT FACE for xdvng, and I use
CSS font family for xdvng - should they render *differently*?

I can totally understand if both of these render using some other font
than xdvng, but to have FONT FACE render differently from CSS - that
is the only issue I was asking about!

And the page http://www.aczoom.com/isongs/0/ff.html
now shows only ASCII characters (removed all 127+ char codes), and
shows the problem....