From: Bob_Hallissy@sil.org
Date: Fri Jun 11 2004 - 09:40:21 CDT
On 11/06/2004 14:39:48 James Kass wrote:
>-------------- Original message from "Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin" :
>--------------
>> On 2004.06.10, 17:11, I wrote:
>>
>> > U+0251 U+0361 U+0302 U+028A as given by BabelMap+Code2000 (see
>> > attached) is not productively different from U+0251
>> > U+0302 U+0361 U+028A (see attached)...
>>
>> Now attached. (Both GIFs are identical, byte by byte, though I swear
>> I made them separately: click the characters in BabelMap, PrtScr,
>> paste into PhotoShop, crop, resample, save!)
>
>You're getting default positioning only, it looks like your system
>doesn't support OpenType combining diacritic positioning for Latin.
>
>Even with OpenType experimental support here, my display looks like
>the GIF you sent. I'll try fixing this,
Um, good luck. I am not sure it is possible to correctly position
double-diacritics with OpenType logic. Specifically, the vertical position
of the double-diacritic must be adjusted so that it is above the *taller*
of the preceding and following combining sequence. AFAIK, such logic isn't
feasible in OpenType.
>Fonts and rendering systems probably aren't ready for this kind of
>combination yet.
SIL Graphite handles it, but then we don't [yet] have wide-spread
availability of Graphite-capable applications.
>> > U+0251 U+0361 U+0302 U+028A as given by BabelMap+Code2000 (see
>> > attached) is not productively different from U+0251
>> > U+0302 U+0361 U+028A (see attached)...
>
>Following the "inside-out" rule, the first sequence should render
>correctly, the second sequence should not.
Not sure what you are saying here or what you mean by the inside-out rule.
The two sequences are canonically equivalent and should look identical.
Bob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 11 2004 - 09:41:10 CDT