On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Vinesh Kumar (JIRA) <j...@apache.org> wrote:

>
>     [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1969?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15175872#comment-15175872
> ]
>
> Vinesh Kumar commented on FOP-1969:
> -----------------------------------
>
> Hi Glenn,
>
> We are using FOP 2.0 and looking for non-BMP characters support (for FULL
> CJK Unicode ranges). So, When can we expect the support of non-BMP
> characters in FOP.
>

If you submit a patch that adds this support, then it will happen sooner. I
do not have any resources to spend on this feature at this time.
Accordingly, I am moving it to Unassigned.


>
> Regards,
> Vinesh Kumar. D
>
> > Surrogate pairs not treated as single unicode codepoint for display
> purposes
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >                 Key: FOP-1969
> >                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1969
> >             Project: FOP
> >          Issue Type: Improvement
> >          Components: unqualified
> >    Affects Versions: trunk
> >         Environment: Operating System: All
> > Platform: All
> >            Reporter: Glenn Adams
> >            Assignee: Glenn Adams
> >         Attachments: testing.fo, testing.fo, testing.pdf, testing.pdf,
> testing.xml, testing.xsl
> >
> >
> > unicode codepoints outside of the BMP (base multilingual plane), i.e.,
> whose scalar value is greater than 0xFFFF (65535), are coded as UTF-16
> surrogate pairs in Java strings, which pair should be treated as a single
> codepoint for the purpose of mapping to a glyph in a font (that supports
> extra-BMP mappings);
> > at present, FOP does not correctly handle this case in simple (non
> complex script) rendering paths;
> > furthermore, though some support has been added to handle this in the
> complex script rendering path, it has not yet been tested, so is not
> necessarily working there either;
>
>
>
> --
> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
> (v6.3.4#6332)
>

Reply via email to