Khaled Hosny <[email protected]> writes: > Just a question, don't CSS have a font fallback mechanism so that > one can set, say, Droid Sans followed by Droid Sans Cyrillic or > Droid Sans CJK if he wants Cyrillic or CJK support?
If your site uses CJK, you'd probably embed a font that supports CJK. If your site uses Cyrillic characters, you'd embed a font that has them. And so on. (The internet can find a place for fonts with all different levels of character coverage.) The CSS fallback mechanism is in case the user's browser doesn't have or can't use the first font you specify. Even with @font-face embedding this can still happen, for instance, if the browser does not support embedded fonts, or if the server hosting the embedded font is unavailable at the moment for some reason. If you end the list with one of the built-ins (usually either "serif" or "sans-serif"), the browser can always as a last resort fall back on one of its default fonts, which these days are usually fonts with pretty good Unicode support (i.e., most characters are covered, and the ones that aren't are generally obscure in the extreme or recently added or both). The browser's default font may not have quite the look and feel you want, but it'll generally be legible (assuming the reader knows the writing system and language you're using, but there's no technical solution to that one, short of providing translations in every language known to man, which is an unreasonable expectation for most websites). -- v4sw5Phw5ln5pr5FPO/ck2ma9u7FLw2/5l6/7i6e6t2b7/en4a3Xr5g5T http://hackerkey.com/decrypt.php?hackerkey=v4sw5PprFPOck2ma9uFw2l6i6e6t2b7en4g5T
