__/ [ Harlan Messinger ] on Thursday 23 March 2006 16:29 \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> __/ [ cordial_camaraderie ] on Wednesday 22 March 2006 08:17 \__
>>>Normally these characters are used in other languages i.e French,
>>>Does the use of these extended characters increases the site download
>> If you vary your default charset, then the browser may have to use
>> additional services, which could lead to lag. The lag seems to be
>> significantly long for non-Latin languages such as Chinese or Arabic. For
>> Latin languages, the lag is not significant.
> *What* lag? An accented character in ISO-8859-1 is one byte, exactly the
> same as any unaccented ASCII character. It seems to me that under any of
> the UTF encodings, the time required to expand the character
> representations is trivial.
>> Although it's a a no-no from the point-of-view of
>> Web standards, you could use Western (standard English) charset and embed
>> "é" or "ê" as images.
> Why? You think image files are smaller than characters?
>> Some Web sites handle the yet-loosely-supported Euro
>> symbol in this manner.
> I have a euro symbol entered directly into a file using UTF-8 encoding
> and serve it as UTF-8. It is displayed as a euro symbol in Netscape 4.7,
> and my copy of Lynx cleverly displays it as "EUR". Add existing support
> by current versions of IE, Mozilla, Netscape, and Firefox, and I wonder
> what you mean by "loosely supported".
I was thinking about Asian languages, which require loading of some extra
components and are slow(er) to render, over here at least. My arguments will
not hold for Latin typography like "é" or "ê", so apologies for my
spontaneous, poorly-generalised remarks.
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Stand for nothing and you will fall for anything"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:05pm up 15 days 10:42, 8 users, load average: 0.48, 0.57, 0.64
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project