I don't like this. It negates any additional processing that may have occurred, such as letter spacing. It requires the IF to repeat part of the layout process. Bad idea.
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Luis Bernardo <lmpmberna...@gmail.com>wrote: > > With the approach implemented by Simon what gets written to the IF file is > the original sequence, not the mapped sequence. Then when generating PDF > from IF the same code that would generate the synthesized mappings when > generating PDF straight from FO is called to recreate the mappings. So I > don't think we can say there is information about the mappings in the text > nodes. > > > On 4/23/13 5:50 AM, Glenn Adams wrote: > > Ah, I reread your earlier (private) message. I see the problem has to do > with the use of synthesized PUA mappings. Here, the problem really is that > the font should always have a CMAP entry that maps to every glyph that can > be produced by the GSUB process. However, not all fonts do this, so in the > case in point, we have to synthesize some mapping, from which we have to > turn to PUA assignments. This works when we generate PDF since we generate > a subset font that contains the synthesized mappings. However, I can see > that if this is going to IF instead of PDF/PS, then we need to find a way > to recreate those synthesized mappings. > > I think this information is really font-specific, and should not be tied > to specific text nodes though. So if Simon's fix uses text nodes, then that > is probably not the best approach. > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: > >> I'm presently at W3C WG meetings this week, but I'll try to get on my >> schedule. I'm not sure what the IF->PS/PDF problem is, since the IF->PDF >> path is clearly working from my tests. >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Luis Bernardo <lmpmberna...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> >>> Glenn, >>> >>> Can you give your opinion about the approach used by Simon? As I >>> mentioned before (in a private message), the IF -> PS/PDF route does not >>> work in your original CS patch (for the languages that CS targets) due to >>> the mapped sequences. Simon's approach works but requires keeping the >>> original sequences alongside the mapped ones. I think it is a good approach >>> but I would like to know if you have a better suggestion before we apply >>> the patch. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Luis >>> >>> >>> On 4/22/13 3:23 PM, Chris Bowditch (JIRA) wrote: >>> >>>> [ >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2210?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel] >>>> >>>> Chris Bowditch reassigned FOP-2210: >>>> ----------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Assignee: Chris Bowditch >>>> >>>> >>>>> [PATCH] Complex script IF to output missing glyphs >>>>> -------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> Key: FOP-2210 >>>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2210 >>>>> Project: Fop >>>>> Issue Type: Bug >>>>> Reporter: simon steiner >>>>> Assignee: Chris Bowditch >>>>> Attachments: csspeedtrunk.patch, fop.xconf, test.fo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> fop test.fo -c fop.xconf -if application/pdf expected.if.xml >>>>> fop -c fop.xconf -ifin expected.if.xml out.pdf >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. >>>> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA >>>> administrators >>>> For more information on JIRA, see: >>>> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira >>>> >>> >>> >> > >
