"Tomas Frydrych" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in 3CC57D83.3949.97D412@localhost:">news:3CC57D83.3949.97D412@localhost:
[Just some terminology clarification. I think it's important that we all use (and understand!) the same terminology, to avoid any unnecessary confusion.] > We should not need to do this. We hold the raw string of the > Unicode values, we pass that to the shaping engine, which > returns to us the shapped string + some additional information > about relationship between the rendered glyphs and the > original glyphs; I assume you mean 'original characters', not 'original glyphs'. > we use the rendered string to draw on screen > and the extra info to navigate. This would not be difficult to > do; No, it almost sounds to easy to be true! ;) But you're right, this is the way it should work. But line- breaking should not be the job of the shaping engine, right? > we already have the raw <-> rendered string mechanism in > fp_TextRun, all we need is to add the extra positional info to > be able to navigate strings where multiple codepoints map to a > single character You probably mean 'glyph' (or 'abstract character'), not character, here. -- Karl Ove Hufthammer
