It should be fine also on Netscape 6.2
etienne99@nettaxi.com wrote:
>I spoke to fast. Upon taking a closer look at the file, the font was not set properly. MacOS 9.2, Indian Language Kit, Mac IE 5.1 and Devanagari MT as font face seem to display UTF-8 encoded Hindi just fine.
>
>Etienne
>
>>Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:24:16 -0800
>>"etienne99@nettaxi.com" <etienne99@nettaxi.com> unicode@unicode.org, cfynn@druknet.net.btCc: creativezeal@hotmail.com
>>RE: Devanagari
>>
>>On this subject, Win2K and IE5+ seem to do a nice job displaying UTF8-encoded Hindi. On the Mac, the Indian Language Kit provides for OS support and fonts (with MacOS 9.2 and above), but I have not been able to display Hindi (UTF8 encoded) with Mac's IE 5.1. Am I correct in assuming that the Mac version of IE does not support Hindi without a hack?
>>
>>Etienne
>>
>>>Reply-To: <cfynn@druknet.net.bt>
>>>"Christopher J Fynn" <cfynn@druknet.net.bt> <unicode@unicode.org>Cc: "Aman Chawla" <creativezeal@hotmail.com>
>>>RE: DevanagariDate: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 23:59:38 +0600
>>>
>>>Aman
>>>
>>>Here in Bhutan the Internet connection is still much worse than in most
>>>places I've visited in India & Nepal (and the cost per minute is several
>>>times higher) - believe me even then UTF-8 (or UTF-16) encoded pages do not
>>>display noticeably slower than ASCII, ISCII or 8-bit font encoded pages -
>>>and I don't need to download any special plug-ins or fonts.
>>>
>>>- Chris
>>>
>>>--
>>>Christopher J Fynn
>>>Thimphu, Bhutan
>>>
>>><cfynn@druknet.net.bt>
>>><cfynn@gmx.net>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org]On
>>>>Behalf Of Aman Chawla
>>>>Sent: 21 January 2002 10:57
>>>>To: James Kass; Unicode
>>>>Subject: Re: Devanagari
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "James Kass" <jameskass@worldnet.att.net>
>>>>To: "Aman Chawla" <creativezeal@hotmail.com>; "Unicode"
>>>><unicode@unicode.org>
>>>>Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 12:46 AM
>>>>Subject: Re: Devanagari
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>25% may not be 300%, but it isn't insignificant. As you note, if the
>>>>>mark-up were removed from both of those files, the percentage of
>>>>>increase would be slightly higher. But, as connection speeds continue
>>>>>to improve, these differences are becoming almost minuscule.
>>>>>
>>>>With regards to South Asia, where the most widely used modems are
>>>>approx. 14
>>>>kbps, maybe some 36 kbps and rarely 56 kbps, where broadband/DSL is mostly
>>>>unheard of, efficiency in data transmission is of paramount importance...
>>>>how can we convince the south asian user to create websites in an encoding
>>>>that would make his client's 14 kbps modem as effective (rather,
>>>>ineffective) as a 4.6 kbps modem?
>>>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>Hot After Christmas DEALS on just about everything!
>>http://www.smartshop.com/cgi-bin/main.cgi?ssa=4099
>>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>Hot After Christmas DEALS on just about everything!
>http://www.smartshop.com/cgi-bin/main.cgi?ssa=4099
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jan 22 2002 - 14:03:57 EST