From: Mark Davis ☕ (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Dec 07 2009 - 10:32:51 CST
Because the OS can't depend on the fonts being set up correctly, probably
the best solution is.
- *Show Hidden Mode off:* suppress the drawing of individual glyphs for
default ignorables (after, of course, the processing wherein those
characters may produce effects on the rest of the text).
- *Show Hidden Mode on:* replace the glyphs for those characters by those
drawn from a special font, or by other drawn effects.
That way the proper visual results of the SHM are not dependent on font
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 07:16, Andrew West <email@example.com> wrote:
> 2009/12/7 Doug Ewell <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> > From TUS 5.0, Section 16.2 ("Layout Controls"), page 540:
> > "As with all other alternate format characters, fonts should use an
> > invisible zero-width glyph for representation of both ZWJ and ZWNJ."
> In this respect I think that the Unicode Standard is wrong, or at
> least out of date. It may have been a good idea to use an invisible
> zero-width space glyph ten years ago when there was little expectation
> that ZWJ or ZWNJ would work on most systems, but that is not the case
> today. I note that many fonts on my system, including quite a few
> fonts from Adobe and Microsoft, include a visible glyph for ZWJ, ZWNJ
> and other format characters, but at least on Windows operating systems
> the user will never see them under normal circumstances. But it is
> useful to have the visible glyphs in the font for things like
> character maps and for editors with a "View Hidden Characters" mode.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 07 2009 - 10:35:33 CST