Re: Panther PUA behavior

From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Thu Feb 05 2004 - 13:24:22 EST

Next message: jameskass@att.net: "RE: Infix profanity (Very OT) (was Phonology)"

Previous message: Deborah Goldsmith: "Re: Panther PUA behavior"
In reply to: jameskass@att.net: "Re: Panther PUA behavior"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

On 05/02/2004 09:12, jameskass@att.net wrote:

>Doug Ewell wrote,
>
>
>
>>No, no, I know how ...
>>
>>
>
>I thought you might.
>
>
>
>>... I meant
>>that because Windows doesn't do any fancy font switching in title bars
>>to cover glyphs that aren't in the selected font ...
>>
>>
>
>It's too bad that these user-selectables don't allow for some kind of
>prioritized font list. For "power users".
>
>Best regards,
>
>James Kass
>
>
>
>
>
>
You mean like what Mozilla does? Nice ideas there, but that system is so
powerful (and its UI so inadequate) that it confuses even the power
users. See e.g. http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=232657.

-- 
Peter Kirk
peter@qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk@qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/

Next message: jameskass@att.net: "RE: Infix profanity (Very OT) (was Phonology)"
Previous message: Deborah Goldsmith: "Re: Panther PUA behavior"
In reply to: jameskass@att.net: "Re: Panther PUA behavior"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 05 2004 - 14:34:25 EST