https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151122
--- Comment #44 from Manu <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #43) > List splitting is a good solution. > Its detriments: > * Cannot express the degree-of-coverage (like a partial gray-out could) > Maybe it's possible to express the degree of coverage. I don't think the "list splitting" solution cannot do it. Moreover, it could be done independently of the selected solution. For example in font Liberation Serif we have this covering per block: Latin de base U+0000-U+007F 95/128 Latin-1, supplément U+0080-U+00FF 96/128 Latin étendu A U+0100-U+017F 128/128 Latin étendu B U+0180-U+024F 208/208 Alphabet phonétique international (API) U+0250-U+02AF 96/96 modificateurs phonétiques chassants U+02B0-U+02FF 80/80 Diacritiques U+0300-U+036F 112/112 Grec et Copte U+0370-U+03FF 127/135 Cyrillique U+0400-U+04FF 256/256 supplément cyrillique U+0500-U+052F 24/48 Hébreu U+0590-U+05FF 87/88 etc. In the fonts parameters, maybe we could add a table where the user can set an identification letter per block: Table « Display covering of these code pages by identification letter » : [L] Latin de base U+0000-U+007F /128 [L] Latin-1, supplément U+0080-U+00FF /128 [L] Latin étendu A U+0100-U+017F /128 [L] Latin étendu B U+0180-U+024F /208 [ ] Alphabet phonétique international (API) U+0250-U+02AF /96 [L] modificateurs phonétiques chassants U+02B0-U+02FF /80 [L] Diacritiques U+0300-U+036F /112 [G] Grec et Copte U+0370-U+03FF /135 [C] Cyrillique U+0400-U+04FF /256 [C] supplément cyrillique U+0500-U+052F /48 [H] Hébreu U+0590-U+05FF /88 etc. Therefore for the font Liberation Serif, we can calculate : [L] = 95/128 + 96/128 + 128/128 + 208/208 + 80/80 + 112/112 = 632 / 784 = 0,81 [G] = 127/135 = 0,94 [C] = 256/256 + 24/48 = 280 / 304 = 0,92 [H] = 87/88 = 0,98 (blocks without letter are ignored in the calculation) And with Superscript numbers (º¹²³⁴⁵⁶⁷⁸⁹) or Subscript (₀₁₂₃₄₅₆₇₈₉) we can add the covering before the name of the font (only the first decimal digit is enough) in order to compare easily the different lines: L⁸G⁹C⁹H⁹ Liberation Serif Possible other symbols if you don’t like numbers: ◌ not covered ◔ partially (25 %) ◑ (partially 50%) ◕ (partially 75%) ● fully covered It takes a minimal size, and the user can choose the code pages he want to see and regroup them in a unique identifier. And if the user can order the identifiers in the table, we could also imagine the list to be ordered descending, showing the most covering font first. And if a normal user want to ignore this, no problem and the font list stays like as before. Another side of the story, is the problem of shapes. For example with bulgarian, it must have a different italic shape than russian (see the table with 3 colors in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_alphabet ) Therefore Liberation Serif is not fully compliant, even when we set the language to Bulgarian. Maybe it would be to heavy to add this kind of information in the program code. Maybe it would be simpler to only indicate next to the selected langage combobox, that there is 0 or « n » specific shapes for this language in this font ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
