Eli Zaretskii <e...@gnu.org> writes: >> Date: Sun, 02 May 2021 10:12:43 +0900 >> From: Shingo Tanaka <shingo....@gmail.com> >> >> When exporting org-mode document to plain text (either ascii/unicode/utf-8) >> with `org-export-dispatch', Emacs inserts lines under headlines, inline >> tasks, table rows and titles of the document, TOC, list of listings, list of >> tables and footnotes. The problem is it inserts too long (double width) line >> when the line character has a width of 2. >> >> Those lines are made of 3 types of characters below (in ox-ascii.el): >> 1) org-ascii-underline >> 2) (if (eq (plist-get info :ascii-charset) 'utf-8) ?─ ?_) >> 3) (if utf8p ?━ ?_) >> >> In case of 1), it correctly takes account of the case in which the character >> has a width of 2 in `org-ascii--build-title', by dividing the line width by >> `(char-width under-char)' (line 700-701), maybe because the character is user >> configurable and its width in unknown. However, in case of 2) and >> 3), maybe because the characters is embedded in the code, it looks like only >> considering the character always has a width of 1. But the reality is >> character ?─ or ?━ can have a width of 2 in the screen displayed with some >> fonts (ex. "Noto Sans Mono CJK JP"), and in that case the line width gets >> doubled of the expected width. >> >> Attached one is a potential patch. The basic concepts are: >> >> a) Do the same in case of 2) and 3) as in case of 1) >> (dividing the line width by `(char-width under-char)', >> assuming `char-width-table' is correctly set) >> >> b) Prefer the longer line width if the width is odd, even in case of 1) >> (adding `(1- (char-width under-char))' to dividend, >> just because it should be more beautiful ;-) ) > > You reported a similar bug already, and I replied there that TRT in > these cases is to use window-text-pixel-size, which will automatically > account for the actual width on display of any characters and any > fonts specified for displaying them. char-width is an approximation, > and is accurate only on TTY frames.
Isn't the primary result of org-export a plain (UTF-8) text file, instead of an emacs buffer to be displayed in a GUI or TTY frame? If so, maybe the criterion for correctness should be that "cat filename.txt" looks as expected in a terminal, even if opening that file in Emacs shows lines of different lengths due to variable-pitch faces etc.