Update of bug #67244 (group groff):
Status: In Progress => Need Info
Assigned to: gbranden => deri
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #10:
[comment #9 comment #9:]
> Sorry to be a pain but this commit has revealed a problem.
Only 2 things pain me here. Well, 3, but the third pains you too.
1. You should have set the ticket's "open/closed" datum to "open" when
changing the status from "fixed" to "in progress".
Not a deal, I eventually found it. :)
2. I feel like you've expanded the scope of the ticket considerably.
The objective of this ticket was only to fix the problems depicted graphically
in comment #1 and comment #2.
> The problem is linked to the design decision to use decomposed unicode as the
> primary key for looking up the font table, which is essentially what the
> groff fonts are.
A redesign of _groff_'s character resolution processes, or mappings from
special character identifiers to Unicode code points (where applicable), seem
like a much bigger and longer-term project than contemplated in comment #0.
That said, maybe this bug *should* remain "in progress" (and should become
"open" again) until, as you said in comment #2:
> all greek SYMBOLS should only appear in symbol.map and not in
> text.map. Similarly preconv and afmtodit (with text.map) should
> be using unicode uXXXX names.
I've been giving some attention to bug #66876, and have grown increasingly
uneasy with the blanket dumping of all text font character names into
symbol.map, and the appearance of character names that historically are
unstyled (and therefore "special" in that sense) *also* showing up in
text.map.
Except for the *m and mc confusion, it seems we've mostly gotten away from
this because the Adobe/URW font's character coverage is fairly static and
disjunctive.
But I'm starting to think that our text.map and symbol.map files are actually
specific to the Adobe/URW fonts. Maybe I'm wrong, and glyph naming is much
more consistent among third party fonts. But that still wouldn't make it
incorrect to get text.map and symbol.map out of each others business, making
them disjunct lists of characters; any overlap should be specifically
motivated and documented.
First, what do you think of this text.map/symbol.map reform?
Secondly, are you willing to migrate the design issue of _libgroff_'s
Unicode<->glyph mapping to another ticket?
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?67244>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
