Thanks Martin! This helps a lot. So how we can document that those are Simple, and make sure about the ones you were not sure about?
behdad On 09/08/11 00:36, Martin Hosken wrote: > Dear Behdad, > > Here is a list of scripts that I think shouldn't be using the indic shaper. > Justification of simple means that there is no reordering or conjuncts > involved and that there is probably no actual shaping (so just generic > shaping will be sufficient). > > BATAK: ? Simple > BRAHMI: ? Simple > HANUNOO: ? Simple > KAYAH_LI: Simple > LAO: See Thai > LIMBU: Simple > MEETEI_MAYEK: ? Simple > MYANMAR: Current implementations do not have complex shaping. The > current indic shaper is inappropriate. This is a temporary measure. Ideally > the font should be queried for a key feature like blwf. If missing, then use > generic shaping else use either fixed indic or myanmar specific. > PHAGS_PA: Simple > SAURASHTRA: ? Simple > SYLOTI_NAGRI: Simple > TAGALOG: Simple > TAGBANWA: Simple > TAI_LE: Simple > TAI_VIET: See Thai > THAI: No reordering, no conjuncts, some ligation, generic shaping > sufficient. Note that for the Thai class of scripts reordering prevowels > would be wrong. > TIBETAN: Subjoined characters have their own codes. > > HTH, > Martin > _______________________________________________ > HarfBuzz mailing list > HarfBuzz@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz > _______________________________________________ HarfBuzz mailing list HarfBuzz@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
