From: Paul Rohr (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Apr 24 2002 - 03:57:59 EDT
At 08:41 AM 4/24/02 +0100, Andrew Dunbar wrote:
> --- Paul Rohr <email@example.com> wrote: > At 03:54
>> To be clear, even divisions won't *ever* look pretty
>> enough to reproduce in
>> a Unicode manual (except by accident). This
>> approach just gives clear
>> visual feedback that you only selected "a third" of
>> the glyph. No more, no
>I don't think the feedback will be as clear as you
>suggest in many cases. Arabic fonts tend to be small
>and have skinny letters. It's hard to tell just what
>is and what isn't selected.
Point taken. Three responses.
1. Even a few pixels should be distinguishable. For example, the mailer
I'm using has a single-pixel-width cursor. By comparison, the cursor we use
in AbiWord looks beefy to me.
2. People use zoom. Especially when the @#$^% fonts are too small. (Yes,
this assumes the availability of decent scalable fonts for Arabic.)
3. Do such fonts actually exist? If not, recruit someone to make some.
Please. We write software here. There's only so much we can do. :-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 24 2002 - 03:58:19 EDT