On 7 May 2011, at 17:43, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > A Friday, April 01, 2011, Albert Astals Cid va escriure: >> A Divendres, 1 d'abril de 2011, Tim Brody va escriure: >>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 23:28:02 +0100, Albert Astals Cid <[email protected]> >>> >>> wrote: >>>> A Dimecres, 30 de març de 2011, vàreu escriure: >>>>> On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 22:45 +0100, Albert Astals Cid wrote: >>>>>>>> I still get >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -R. L¨wen and B. Polster >>>>>>>> -o >>>>>>>> +R. Lowen and B. Polster >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Maybe you sent a old version of the patch? Can anyone confirm if >>>> >>>> My bad, somehow vi/diff/less are showing me o but if i open it in kate >>>> i see >>>> an ö >>> >>> That will be because it's separate characters (X + combining char). You >>> could normalise with unicodeNormalizeNFKC but I thought it probably >>> better to leave text - as far as possible - unchanged from the PDF >>> source. >> >> Hmmmmmm, since we are already changing the "real" representation of the >> text (i.e transforming it from broken to not broken), i think i prefer one >> that is easy to use (i.e. shows ö in most of the tools), what do others >> think? > > Since the others are not there, please do what i want and output a real ö
If you're going to apply a Unicode normalization process, please use NFC rather than NFKC. This will deal with creating precomposed letter+accent combinations, but avoids introducing "compatibility" changes that may lose significant distinctions in the text. JK _______________________________________________ poppler mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
