On Friday 08 December 2006 20:03, Jan Willem Stumpel wrote:
> The "combining accents" problem seems really complicated.
> Depending on the font and the rendering engine, combining accents
> are sometimes displayed/printed correctly, or sometimes not.

Correct.

> Here are the results of some experiments, trying to display the
> following combining (not pre-combined) accents:

[...]

> Font                       OO    GE   TW   CA   CL   GS
> ====                       ==    ==   ==   ==   ==   ==
>
> Andale Mono                 -     -         -    A    -
>
> Arial                      ++    ++         +    A    +
>
> AR PL KaitiM GB            ++    ++         -    A

I highly doubt, that the Arphic fonts can do combining accents. The 
accents are not present in those fonts. Which simply means, that your 
font rendering engine replaced the glyphs with some from other fonts.

> Well, I cannot make heads or tails of this. In general, the
> behaviour of pango seems to be the same as that of Openoffice,
> apart from the case Courier 10 pitch (which is a type 1 font). But
> why the combining accents work in some fonts and not in others, I
> have no clue. Are there bugs in the rendering engines? Or (more
> likely) in the fonts? But what are these bugs exactly?

Both.

The fonts need to contain
a) the base glyphs
b) the combining accents
c) "anchors" in the GPOS table to tell the rendering engine where 
exactly to place the accents. In fontforge this is done easily. :)

The rendering engine needs to support the GPOS table and render the 
glyphs according to it. AFAIK only pango can do this currently.

M$ has cheated in its Times New Roman font. They use the normal accents, 
not the combining ones and give them a negative position. Some 
rendering engines will then appear to render them "correctly", although 
they actually don't. This might also be the answer for the next 
question...

> Thomas Wolff also showed paps results with "vera sans mono" which
> shows the accents *before* the base letters. Which font is this
> exactly? It it obviously not the same as "Bitstream vera Sans Mono".
>

HTH
Arne
-- 
Arne Götje (高盛華) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/685D1E8C
Fingerprint: 2056 F6B7 DEA8 B478 311F  1C34 6E9F D06E 685D 1E8C
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net.   Encrypted e-mail preferred.

Attachment: pgpTF09zFxuKw.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to