[NTG-context] [Dev-luatex] State of OpenType support
Hans Hagen
pragma at wxs.nl
Thu May 8 20:02:10 CEST 2008
Khaled Hosny wrote:
> (Moved from lautex mailing list, more bellow)
char 1614 and 1617 are to be relatively positioned using mkmk, so we
need a mark and a basemark match an donly anchor-11 qualifies as
basemark but ...
{
["anchors"]={
["basemark"]={["Anchor-11"]={["x"]=0,["y"]=250,},},
["mark"]={["Anchor-13"]={["x"]=0,["y"]=-100,},["Anchor-7"
]={["x"]=0,["y"]=0,},},
},
["name"]="shadda",
["unicode"]=1617,
},
{
["anchors"]={
["mark"]={["Anchor-13"]={["x"]=0,["y"]=-100,},["Anchor-7"]={["x"]=0,["y"]=0,},},
},
["name"]="fatha",
["unicode"]=1614,
},
there is no mark reference in 1614 ...
i'm not that fluent in fontforge so i cannot play further
> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 02:11:38PM +0300, Khaled Hosny wrote:
>> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 12:53:56PM +0200, Hans Hagen wrote:
>>> Khaled Hosny wrote:
>>>> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Hans Hagen wrote:
>>>>> Khaled Hosny wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 10:10:23AM +0200, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>>>>>>> Hans Hagen wrote:
>>>>>>>> Khaled Hosny wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I also tried "Nafees Nastaliq" font
>>>>>>>>> http://www.crulp.org/software/localization/Fonts/nafeesNastaleeq.html
>>>>>>>>> with also broken result.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> See also the arabic chapter (XIII) in mk.pdf:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://pragma-ade.com/general/manuals/mk.pdf
>>>>>>>>> I was actually testing the fonts under its guidance :)
>>>>>>>> Can you two team up on this issue? the problem is that esp the
>>>>>>>> scripting part of OT is not really defined, only has de facto
>>>>>>>> specs i.e. reversed engineered uniscribe.
>>>>>>> I had a quick look at the font with fontforge. It could that
>>>>>>> (part of the) problems are related to the fact that most of the
>>>>>>> glyph encodings
>>>>>>> in the font do not follow unicode, even though the font claims to be a
>>>>>>> UnicodeBMP encoded font. It is quite possible that that confuses the
>>>>>>> contextual analyser in MkIV.
>>>>>> I'm relaying solely on OpenType here, i.e. the actual glyphs aren't
>>>>>> encoded and using isol, init, etc features to map characters to the
>>>>>> appropriate glyphs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I tested it with two other OpenType implementations, and I got the
>>>>>> expected result.
>>>>> this mkmk feature ...
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) is it directionally sensitive? some features are marked as r2l, some not
>>>> No its not, I think r2l is applicable for cursive anchors and should
>>>> mean nothing here (I was trying some thing but forget to remove it
>>>> after).
>>>> I removed r2l marl from all tables (except curs), but this changed
>>>> nothing.
>>>>
>>>>> (2) do you use proper mark -> basemark? or just mark to mark?
>>> keep in mind that when you update your font, you have to remove the
>>> cached version
>> I removed the enteries in fonts/otf of the cache dir, is this enough?
>>
>
> Uploaded Pango output of the same string for comparison,
> http://khaled.djihed.com/context/
> (Note: the dots are marks, not part of the base glyph; the dot is
> basemark and the haraka is mark).
>
> Thanks,
> Khaled
>
>> Khaled
>>
>>> Hans
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
>>> Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
>>> tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
>>> | www.pragma-pod.nl
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> Khaled Hosny
>> Arabic localizer and member of Arabeyes.org team
>
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the ntg-context
mailing list