[HarfBuzz] Multiple substitution and mark positioning
Behdad Esfahbod
behdad at behdad.org
Fri Jun 8 19:14:19 PDT 2012
Hi Khaled and others,
I fixed this, among other things, including a major mlig and mkmk regression.
Please test.
behdad
On 05/12/2012 08:54 AM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> There seems to be a difference between HarfBuzz and Uniscribe on how to
> handle mark positioning when there is multiple glyph substitution,
> namely HB seems to apply the mark to the last component while USP
> applies it to the first component.
>
> In other words, if there is <base> → <base₁><base₂> substitution, the
> sequence <base><mark> will be rendered as if it was <base₁><base₂><mark>
> with HB, but as <base₁><mark><base₂> with USP.
>
> Using hb-shape with “uniscribe” shaper, and the word “سَتا” and Arabic
> Typesetting font, I get
>
> [uniFE8E=3+343|uniFE98=2+376|uni064E=0 at 501,-260|uni0640.curvehalf=0@,34+152|uniFEB3=0@,34+840]
> ^^^^^^^^
> but with “ot” shaper, I get:
>
> [uniFE8E=3+343|uniFE98=2+376|uni064E=0 at -11,-310|uni0640.curvehalf=0@,34+152|uniFEB3=0@,34+840]
> ^^^^^^^^
> though the glyph string is the same, the position of the mark is clearly
> different.
>
> (background: I need this to contextually insert tatweel to avoid mark
> collision in “crowded” places, but with the difference between both
> engines this can’t be reliably done without breaking mark positioning in
> one of them).
>
> Regards,
> Khaled
> _______________________________________________
> HarfBuzz mailing list
> HarfBuzz at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
More information about the HarfBuzz
mailing list