Re: Combining Overstruck diacritics

From: Marnen Laibow-Koser (marnen@marnen.org)
Date: Tue May 29 2007 - 10:12:04 CDT

  • Next message: Ed Trager: "Re: Geographical language data"

    On May 29, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    [...]
    > Using a precomposed character, you can get a a glyph designed by a
    > font designer; using a combining diacritic mark, you often get an
    > oddly placed mark. Theoretically, the rendering engine could map a
    > sequence to the same glyph as the one used for a precomposed
    > character, but this is not common.

    I think this may be more common than you think. Certainly on Mac OS
    X, the standard text engine maps sequences with combining marks to
    precomposed characters where possible. For example:

    (U+00EE, Latin small letter i with circumflex)
    (U+0069, Latin small letter i; U+0302, combining circumflex accent)

    look identical to me, with the circumflex correctly placed and no dot
    on the i. Do these look different to you?

    (P.S. In programs that use nonstandard text engines that don't
    handle combining marks correctly, these sequences *do* look
    different...but that's a separate issue.)

    >
    > --
    > Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    >
    >

    Best,
    Marnen Laibow-Koser
    marnen@marnen.org



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 29 2007 - 10:22:09 CDT