<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/">
</head>
<body><span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:page74010-sf@yahoo.fr" title="ajlittoz <page74010-sf@yahoo.fr>"> <span class="fn">ajlittoz</span></a>
</span> changed
<a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_UNCONFIRMED "
title="UNCONFIRMED - Diacritical mark handling in Writer (may apply to other components)"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=139210">bug 139210</a>
<br>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
<tr>
<th>What</th>
<th>Removed</th>
<th>Added</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">Status</td>
<td>NEEDINFO
</td>
<td>UNCONFIRMED
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align:right;">Ever confirmed</td>
<td>1
</td>
<td>
</td>
</tr></table>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_UNCONFIRMED "
title="UNCONFIRMED - Diacritical mark handling in Writer (may apply to other components)"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=139210#c6">Comment # 6</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_UNCONFIRMED "
title="UNCONFIRMED - Diacritical mark handling in Writer (may apply to other components)"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=139210">bug 139210</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:page74010-sf@yahoo.fr" title="ajlittoz <page74010-sf@yahoo.fr>"> <span class="fn">ajlittoz</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>Sorry for having zapped the latest comment(s).
It effectively appears it is highly dependent on the font.
Although some marks have property "connects on left and right", the vertical
position of the mark depends on the glyph to which it is applied (height of
ascender/descender). Consequently a "continuous" overline or underline cannot
be guaranteed. This adds to the "jitter" on the horizontal position.
Also my computer has been updated (OS, DE, LO) since I filed this report and
behaviour is not exactly the same as described above. LO is now 7.1.4.2 (don't
know for Harfbuzz) and seems to have a more regular rendering.
As I commented in AskLO question, the initial purpose looks to me as an abuse
of Unicode features. We are perhaps in an undefined area of Unicode because
this "decoration" attempt does not correspond to any typographical usage in any
language, except possibly in maths but there are dedicated formula editors for
that.
A remark about the PDF attachment (comparison chart between several fonts):
some sequences are wrong in my opinion because they start with a combining mark
not preceded by a non-combining character. This is obvious in the Liberation
Serif block where a dummy glyph is added (dotted circle) as a place holder for
the "normal" character.
Changed status to UNCONFIRMED but I don't object to closing it with adequate
status.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>