On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Tony Mechelynck <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Even in the first image, you can see that there is poor (if any) support
> of the way nāgarī letters change when joined. The successive glyphs in a
> word


It seems this issue occurs in other Indian languages as well. On a CentOS 5
machine with Kannada Unicode installed, typing u+0C95 followed by u+0CBF
produces a weird consonant-vowel combination. But I was surprised to see
that the same problem does not occur in Eclipse. When the second unicode
character is typed, it is correctly appended to the first one (after a bit
of a delay). The same poor rendering of glyphs observed in VI occurs in a
standard bash shell (Gnome terminal). So there is support for Indic scripts
in some programs, but it doesn't appear to be there in a standard shell.
   It seems like this isn't so much a problem with VI as the underlying
shell that's invoking it right? The way text is rendered on the shell
prompt matches exactly with the way text is rendered in VI.



> shouldn't just be placed next to each other unchanged, see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Devanagari_script#**Biconsonantal_conjuncts<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari_script#Biconsonantal_conjuncts>(and
>  some of the info elsewhere on that page too, in particular the
> consonant-vowel combinations and the photograph of an Australian tram with
> "incorrect" devanāgarī lettering in an advert).
>

I was staring at that advertisement for a while, but I don't quite see what
you mean. There are no vowels in the middle of the word and it seems to be
rendered ok. Where's the incorrect lettering?


>
> Of course, if the (Indian, or sanskriptologist, or…) user of Vim can see
> different glyphs and understand what is being meant, it's better than
> nothing, even if the rendering is less than perfect.
>
>
I think rendering for Indic scripts has a long way to go. Even trying
gmail's input tools with the same version of Firefox on two different OS's,
I noticed that glyphs were not combined correctly on a Mac, but they seemed
fine on a Windows machine. Perhaps the fonts were not correctly installed
on the Mac, or perhaps there just isn't enough interest out there for
someone to fix these bugs/standardize the way Indic fonts are rendered.


>
> Best regards,
> Tony.
> --
>

Thanks,
Ven

-- 
-- 
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"vim_use" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to