On 23/4/13 02:10, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
On 13-04-20 05:49 AM, Jonathan Kew wrote:
On 19/4/13 22:13, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
Konstantin has brought up a few interesting issues regarding variation
selectors. I'll summarize issues that I think can be improved:
- Right now we don't handle a sequence of multiple variation selectors in a
row. What *is* the best way to handle that? Ideally the extra ones should
become visible. Even a box is better than silently not showing them, right?
No - silently not showing them should be the default behavior, IMO. They're
default-ignorable.
I disagree a bit here. What Default_Ignorable really means is: "if you don't
know what to do with them, don't show them". In this case, we do know what to
do with them, and have multiple ones on the same character is an encoding
error, so showing something may be the better choice.
It's no more of an encoding error than a <char, VS> pair that is not a
registered variation sequence. If we're going to make "stray" variation
selectors visible by default, then I think we'd need to check the
validity of all VS occurrences, so that we can consistently make the
"strays" visible, rather than showing some of them and ignoring others.
JK
_______________________________________________
HarfBuzz mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
