Unifont - Bugs: bug #51551, Problems with Tibetan
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
bug #51551: Problems with Tibetan
Submitter: | David Corbett <dscorbett> | ||
Submitted: | Mon 24 Jul 2017 12:44:43 AM UTC | ||
Category: | None | Severity: | 3 - Normal |
Item Group: | None | Status: | Fixed |
Privacy: | Public | Assigned to: | unifoundry |
Open/Closed: | Closed |
Thu 28 Dec 2017 03:31:53 AM UTC, comment #5: |
Paul Hardy <unifoundry> |
Sat 12 Aug 2017 05:29:22 AM UTC, comment #4: David,
|
Paul Hardy <unifoundry> |
Sat 05 Aug 2017 10:10:04 PM UTC, comment #3: Okay. I think the problems with U+0F3E and U+0F7F, being related to mark positioning and not glyph shape, should be uncontroversial enough to fix without waiting. |
David Corbett <dscorbett> |
Sat 05 Aug 2017 10:01:01 PM UTC, comment #2: David,
|
Paul Hardy <unifoundry> |
Mon 24 Jul 2017 05:29:52 AM UTC, comment #1: David,
|
Paul Hardy <unifoundry> |
Mon 24 Jul 2017 12:44:43 AM UTC, original submission:
This bug report has five parts. Some of these problems are not very problematic but I think it is better to err on the side of lots of suggestions.
|
David Corbett <dscorbett> |
No files currently attached
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follow 3 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017-12-28 | unifoundry | Status | None | Fixed | |
Assigned to | None | unifoundry | |||
Open/Closed | Open | Closed |
Powered by Savane 3.13-f8d8.
Corresponding source code
I looked at U+0F3E and U+0F7F and saw that they are actually combining characters, not spacing glyphs. So I am leaving them as combining characters.
Because Tibetan only has those two glyphs as combining characters on the left and right sides of glyphs, and because they are only used with numeric digits, I allowed Tibetan glyphs to be single-width in many cases in the Unifont 10.0.07 release.
Anything more, such as making all astrological symbols double-width, I would like to coordinate with Rich Felker. So I do not plan to make any further changes to Tibetan for now.
Paul Hardy