On 9/22/2023 3:51 PM, Hamid,Idris wrote:
------ Original Message ------
From "Hans Hagen" <j.ha...@xs4all.nl<mailto:j.ha...@xs4all.nl>>
To "ntg-context@ntg.nl<mailto:ntg-context@ntg.nl>"
<ntg-context@ntg.nl<mailto:ntg-context@ntg.nl>>
Date 9/22/2023 7:15:25 AM
Subject [NTG-context] Re: Toggling the symbol for the zero-width joiner and
related Unicode control characters
** Caution: EXTERNAL Sender **
On 9/22/2023 2:39 PM, Hamid,Idris wrote:
b. we want all Unicode control symbols to be suppressed in final pdf output
(for, e.g., printing).
they basically are unless some font features keeps them around which is
out of our control
irr it was you who wanted them to be wiped decades ago as some fonts
visualized them by default
Yes, that's exactly the point: Somewhere along the course of history, it became
standard for Arabic-script fonts (and other cursive-script fonts as well) to
include symbols for the control characters.
In typo-rep there is also
%D \starttyping
%D \definefontfeature[default][default][mode=node,formatters=strip]
%D \stoptyping
You included some notes about Khaled, so I guess he faced the same issue. His
Amiri font displays the symbols by default, as do other Arabic fonts.
(It seems he never considered making it an opentype feature in the font itself,
but since his focus is/was XeTeX/HB (HB is rather rigid and dictatorial) I
guess that's not surprising.)
I admit that I don't follow what happens with xetex (they changed the
rendere at some point indeed) not HB (I only notice that it gets updates
frequently in the tex live repository which makes me wonder how one
retains compatility unless one freezes). I actually kept the lib binding
code that can use it around for your font testing (we wanted to see what
uniscribe does), not sure if it still works.
Anyway, we're entering the bug cq. side effect becomes feature area
here; just like yesterdays perfect bidi algorithm is todays less pefect
one replaced by ...
But therein lies the problem: ConTeXt shows the rendering by default, and we
need to turn it off. Since most non-Latin typography targets Uniscribe
applications which allows for toggling, the font developers (commercial or
free) don't have to concern themselves with this issue.
if context shows it then it is not a feature but hard coded shapes which
is weird; how does one know what to 'remove' or not? And in what stage?
If they are zero width it is simple to ignore them in the backend, if
they have dimensions (w/h/d) then they contributed and wiping is tricky
Since Word rules the world, most font designers target it. Since Word provides
for toggling the symbols -- needed for editing purposes -- there was no need
for Arabic-script font designers to worry about the symbols showing up where
they are not wanted.
(I suppose that InDesign behaves the same way.)
I don't know ... irr these dtp programs are more like "if you want this
feature applied select a range of characters and apply it"
That's what was meant when I spoke of the continued effects of the WYSIWYG
curse: It saved font designers from having to think much about this issue.
In some way it's also flaws in the open type approach. Basically that
happens when application stuff becomes a standard and one forgets that
it was (is) application driven. (And you haven't seen variable fonts and
color fonts yet ... no pretty standards either.)
Not really -) This brings us to the point of consistency: For Arabic-script fonts, hard
symbolic rendering of the Unicode control characters is the rule, not the exception. So
not "an inconsistent mess" -- at least not as far as Arabic-script typography
is concerned.
Funny rules ... but I'm not going top enable 'wipe' by default: after
all, one gets what one deserves, nto what one likes (which can differ
per day). But you can enable the wiping. We can of course ignore in the
backend when zero width but then how to explain that they contributed to
the ht/dp (unless we wipe these dimensions) ... all slow-downers
so you want to see soem zwj sumbol in a rendered text?
Only in verbatim/\type'd text where it is appropriate, even necessary. Thanks
to Word/WYSIWYG, the rule is de facto, but it is not de jure -)
Ideally, Scintilla (Scite, Notepad++, etc.) should do the same, or provide a
toggle, as MS Notepad does.
(Tangent: In terms of Unicode functionality, MS Notepad is still unrivalled,
even in 2023!)
We agree that for final printed output it is not appropriate (except perhaps in
a paper that discusses Unicode, fonts, etc., in which case it can be rendered
using the figures or symbols mechanism -- or toggled as needed.)
so what is it now:
- for verbatim you can use almfixed and they show up (when they have a
glyph)
- for other fonts if they have them they show up (unless gone in the
process ot rendering)
- but you can wipe them optionally
not sure what more we need
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : https://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
