According to [1]: uni0F620F90 is a mix of uni0F62 plus uni0F90, IOW: RA plus SUBJOINED KA
and the other uni0F6A0F90 is a mix of uni0F6A plus uni0F90, IOW: FIXED-FORM RA plus SUBJOINED KA The latter shows no character shaping and should only be used for transliteration or transcription. Since current FOP doesn't implement character shaping, the only layout you get is the one with no character shaping. I have not sufficient knowledge to determine if the initial text should take Tibetan letters in a reduced range (0F00-0F6F) or not, delegating to user-agent (= FOP) the character selection, depending on its place in the word. But I think that a such mechanism should be implemented. [1] http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0F00.pdf Pascal Le 02/06/2010 12:46, ruud grosmann a écrit : > Hi Pascal, > > on the other hand: when a ra character is followed by a low ka character, fop > - recognizes they are belonging to a stack (one result character) > - creates a more or less sensible result, namely a ra on a ka. > > Does fop just put them on top of each other, using two characters of > the font, or does it select from the font a combined character? In > that case, it might be so that it just picks the wrong ra (the > topmost). From the screenshots one can see that one has the name > uni0F620F90 and the other uni0F6A0F90. If fop uses these names to > select the appropriate character, then it might be a simple fix. > > regards, Ruud > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
