https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151122
--- Comment #45 from Eyal Rozenberg <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Manu from comment #44) I'll start by saying that, if we are tending to accept the list partition solution, then - we should probably differ the discussion of partial-coverage-indication to a later time and a separate bug, because we can start with something simpler (and a "relaxed" heuristic), then refine it later. Anyway, > For example in font Liberation Serif we have this covering per block: > ... > In the fonts parameters, maybe we could add a table where the user can set > an identification letter per block: The thing is, block coverage rate is not a good enough indicator of language glyph coverage, for some written languages. Just as an example: A font could cover all Hebrew cantillation marks, but fail to cover final letter forms (םןףךץ) or digits (1234567890). It covers more, but is much less usable. > Possible other symbols if you don’t like numbers: > ◌ not covered ◔ partially (25 %) ◑ (partially 50%) > ◕ (partially 75%) ● fully covered That's an interesting suggestion graphically - regardless of how we actually evaluate coverage. But it would be at least challenging, if not controvertial, to "stick" something like this onto the list of fonts. I still think a good starting point would be just the partition Mike suggested - a rather minimal change UI-wise, with a lot of "bang for the buck". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
