Can you suggest an alternative approach please?
On 24/04/2013 02:41, Glenn Adams wrote:
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
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
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 <mailto:lmpmberna...@gmail.com>> wrote:
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.
On 4/22/13 3:23 PM, Chris Bowditch (JIRA) wrote:
Chris Bowditch reassigned FOP-2210:
Assignee: Chris Bowditch
[PATCH] Complex script IF to output missing glyphs
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: simon steiner
Assignee: Chris Bowditch
fop.xconf, test.fo <http://test.fo>
fop test.fo <http://test.fo> -c fop.xconf -if
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: