EastAsianWidth.txt contains:
3248..324F;A # No [8] CIRCLED NUMBER TEN ON BLACK SQUARE..CIRCLED
NUMBER EIGHTY ON BLACK SQUARE
i.e. it classifies the width of the characters at codepoints
between 3248 and 324F as ambiguous.
Is this really correct? Shouldn’t they be “W”, i.e. wide?
In mos
On 8/16/2017 6:26 AM, Mike FABIAN via
Unicode wrote:
EastAsianWidth.txt contains:
3248..324F;A # No [8] CIRCLED NUMBER TEN ON BLACK SQUARE..CIRCLED NUMBER EIGHTY ON BLACK SQUARE
i.e. it classifies the width of the characters at codepoints
between 3248 and
I do agree, only CJK fonts using in CJK contexts will render them as "W"
(i.e. the fixed-width srandard ideogaphic composition square). If they are
used in Latin, they will adopt the metrics of the Latin font including
them, thery will be square but not necessarily aligned with the ideographic
squa
On 8/16/2017 7:23 AM, Philippe Verdy
via Unicode wrote:
These
squared (or circled) characters however do not have registered
variants for digits with descenders (used in traditional
typographic fonts for Latin), such as 4, 7 or 9, or variable-width
4 matches
Mail list logo