httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hiroaki KAWAI <>
Subject Re: elements <glossary> and <phonetic>
Date Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:11:21 GMT
=?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andr=E9?= Malo <> wrote:
> * Hiroaki KAWAI <> wrote:
> > -1 for <phonetic> as I can't view correctly with IE on Windows, because of
> > lack of phonetic fonts. I think large part of the users don't have 
> > phonetic fonts in the system. 
> I'd guess, a large part of the users don't even have Japanese fonts on their
> system ;-).

Yes, yes I know. ;-)

> Seriously: as long as the phonetic elements stay on the glossary page, I
> have no problems with them. Funnily on my linux box, firefox and konqueror
> have problems with some of the IPA characters, but opera and lynx get them
> all (the latter transscribes them very smoothly).

Funny enough, Netscape7.1 on Windows (the same machine) could 
handle the rendering of phonetic elements. Humm... what's wrong with 
IE, don't you know? :-p
I just don't want to fail to help the majority, i.e. IE on Windows. 
The problem of 'mojibake' is very misleading.

Anothoer point that came up to my mind is, how far should we translate 
the glossary index words. Refering the example, phonetic elements are 
to help only the words that are not familiar with newbie. This is 
reasonable. The point is, the indexes are localized ones. 
So, if we, Japanese staff, translate this glossary page into 
Japanese, how should we treat the phonetic elements?
I think we should use 'katakana' for translated Japanese words, 
phonetic symbols for English words that still does not have a 
corresponding translations. Any ideas, yoshiki?
We shall need a consensus on this point. ;-)
# Japanese are very falimiar with phonetic symbols of English words.

---Hiroaki Kawai

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message