Comment inline. Note that I have assigned the new bug to myself, so I will
undertake the work to satisfy this.

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 1:25 AM, Vincent Hennebert <vhenneb...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I’m not keen on adding Yet Another configuratin option to the config
> file, there are more than enough already.
>

What's the purpose in having a configuration file if it isn't used for
configuration information?


> I believe that if a user is advanced enough to be aware that a last
> resort font can be configured, then they are also able to configure
> custom fonts so as to avoid any glyph missing warning.
>

That's possible as a temporary work around, but it is not really sufficient
in the long term to satisfy documented Unicode behavior.


> Moreover this last resort font is a TrueType font, which is not
> supported by all output formats yet.
>

It can be converted. Ideally, FOP would ship with a reasonable built-in last
resort font. I will discuss with the Unicode Consortium whether this might
be possible. I am acquainted with the original designer of that font,
Michael Everson, so perhaps I can obtain a contributed copy that could be
distributed.


> Both Type1 and TrueType (OpenType) fonts have a dedicated glyph for
> unsupported characters. I think this is what FOP should fall back to in
> case of a missing glyph.
>

Yes, that is well when there is no last resort font, but it is not really
adequate.


> Vincent
>
>
> Glenn Adams wrote:
> > Unicode does not prescribe how to render characters for which the
> assigned
> > font(s) have no corresponding glyph(s). It does, however, make
> > recommendations on how an application or system should handle this case,
> > about which see Unicode 5.1 Section 5.3 Unknown and Missing Characters,
> > under the sub-heading of *Interpretable but Unrenderable Characters*. See
> > also the following FAQ:
> >
> >
> http://unicode.org/faq/unsup_char.html?PHPSESSID=a05ee80b0f30ee349b9851a929e4e4e6
> >
> > What FOP should be doing, rather than map an unrenderable character to
> '#',
> > is to employ a so called Last Resort font, where each defined character
> is
> > associated with some glyph, e.g., one that indicates the script of the
> > character. In the absence of such a Last Resort font, it is customary to
> map
> > the character to a glyph depicting an empty box.
> >
> > Unicode has published such a Last Resort font see:
> >
> > http://www.unicode.org/policies/lastresortfont_eula.html
> >
> > A reasonable strategy for FOP might be to allow the user to specify (in
> the
> > FOP configuration file) a font mapping to a last resort font to be used
> in
> > such cases. The user would still have to download and install the last
> > resort font on their system, due to licensing reasons.
> >
> > I will post a bug to this effect, and suggesting this solution, if there
> is
> > not already one present. Some minor modifications to FOP would be
> required
> > to make use of the configuration information specifying a last resort
> font,
> > and then using that font when no mapping is present in the assigned font.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Glenn
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Eric Douglas <edoug...@blockhouse.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I don't understand what unicode.org is saying if it's just referring to
> >> what characters the codes should reference if they have to be in the
> >> font.  Fontforge says U2610 and U2611 are not in the font.
> >>
> >> Fontforge is an ugly program.  It runs within Cygwin, where it displays
> >> a window showing the characters in the font, but it doesn't show them
> >> all and doesn't have a scrollbar..
> >> I would like an easy way to view the characters in the font to see if I
> >> have something available that looks like a square/checkbox.
> >> I can only assume the square I'm getting is a default in FOP 0.95 for
> >> all missing glyphs.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:j3322...@yahoo.de]
> >> Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 11:20 AM
> >> To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Font Glyph?
> >>
> >> On 15.07.2010 22:44, Eric Douglas wrote:
> >>> Then I pass a text value of "&#x2611;" in my XML.  When the
> >>> transformer uses FOP to translate the XML into output, this prints a
> >> square.
> >> Have a look at http://www.unicode.org/charts/charindex.html
> >> U2611 is "BALLOT BOX WITH CHECK", i.e. not a square (U2610 should be a
> >> square, are you sure about the entity?) If FOP couldn't find the glyph,
> >> it would have printed a # instead.
> >> You could use one of the font editors to check whether your font
> >> actually has a glyph for the U2611 character (try
> >> http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/)
> >>
> >>
> >>> I tried replacing my fop.jar with one that I compiled from the Trunk,
> >>> and instead of printing the square it printed an error message to the
> >>> Java Console that the font doesn't contain the specified glyph.
> >> That's mildly odd, I'd guess your method for telling FOP about your font
> >> doesn't work as in Trunk.
> >>
> >> J.Pietschmann
> >>
> >
>

Reply via email to