To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=107419





------- Additional comments from [email protected] Tue Dec 15 07:54:33 +0000 
2009 -------
Looks almost good now. It still needs to be thoroughly tested, e.g. comparing 
each char with other 
fonts that support them, comparing the relation of widths, checking with the 
unicode standard, etc.

Some more observations:
The advance widths of the dashes should respect the unicode requirements, e.g. 
the advance width of 
the em-dash should be exactly 2048 for a font like this with an em-size of 
2048. I'm aware that I was 
the one who requested that there must be some space on either side of the 
dashes, but this should be 
done by trying to have the cumulative widths of left-side-bearing, dash and 
right-side-bearing be the 
required width. Example: in OpenSymbol 2.3.6 the em-dash U+2014 had an advance 
width of 2048, 
but there was no spacing on either side. For OpenSymbol 2.3.7 there was some 
spacing added on the 
left side (128 wide) and some spacing on the right side (126 wide). Doing that 
without reducing the 
ink-width of the dash glyph extended the cumulative width to 2302. It should be 
at 2048 though. 
Doing the math on how much the ink-width of the dash needs to be reduced to 
satisfy this ambitious 
goal of targeting an advance width of 2048 is left as an exercise to the 
reader...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to