From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#63731: [PATCH] Support Emoji Variation Sequence 16 (FE0F) where appropriate Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 20:43:37 +0300 Message-ID: <83ilcfj8dy.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87a5xrzsph.fsf@stebalien.com> <83pm6nlhll.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8gfmqyt.fsf@gmail.com> <83ilcflbua.fsf@gnu.org> <87mt1rmjjg.fsf@gmail.com> <83v8gfjnzj.fsf@gnu.org> <87edn3mbr3.fsf@gmail.com> <83mt1rjg69.fsf@gnu.org> <875y8fm7x7.fsf@gmail.com> <83lehbjdjd.fsf@gnu.org> <87wn0vkqn1.fsf@gmail.com> <83jzwvj94x.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="15312"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rpluim@gmail.com, 63731@debbugs.gnu.org, steven@stebalien.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri May 26 19:44:25 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q2bUH-0003iO-Df for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 26 May 2023 19:44:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q2bTw-0006wY-7G; Fri, 26 May 2023 13:44:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q2bTu-0006wO-Fr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 May 2023 13:44:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q2bTu-0002k1-7N for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 May 2023 13:44:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1q2bTt-0005Uj-OI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 May 2023 13:44:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 17:44:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 63731 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 63731-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B63731.168512299421054 (code B ref 63731); Fri, 26 May 2023 17:44:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 63731) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 May 2023 17:43:14 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50752 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1q2bT7-0005TW-MW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 26 May 2023 13:43:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:43834) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1q2bT5-0005TJ-Kk for 63731@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 26 May 2023 13:43:12 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q2bT0-0002aR-5K; Fri, 26 May 2023 13:43:06 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=/gBAOXtK1IB0++tuD05PKw+DjykaV0hM/D2Z6KRzlyI=; b=IQu+hL/5mrAA QMdqvZGdxMDj8xcmOHJIvoJPcb3apPSSjbvKZkxHYWgaseZns0aLYK6xMMaAh6JD5+bwGZDfhCHrY 8rLqz2F2LztW/J9egTaPE0IDs5HIdFjJLa9zQc8DuxWbE2Z2ameFT/RabfSXZEMevytFbTvtPEl8s sUf0YgI/tG2TIkAoTRilhaRaJTo7AGojqnQo1hokVL6bSmShyKb2S/ExuHYCT+ty6KdDNeNqAMxfj v3UXT1Kgw8qoBBhDS07ttD0+FdBfknh6YcOk76/8zde5XCKXgyWEZaxw071eKuGmmkQorTCbssfnE DtEO/5F9ZJL6T/aAkpAPRQ==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q2bSz-0000WG-Hh; Fri, 26 May 2023 13:43:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <83jzwvj94x.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Fri, 26 May 2023 20:27:26 +0300) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:262448 Archived-At: > Cc: 63731@debbugs.gnu.org, steven@stebalien.com > Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 20:27:26 +0300 > From: Eli Zaretskii > > > From: Robert Pluim > > Cc: 63731@debbugs.gnu.org, steven@stebalien.com > > Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 18:24:02 +0200 > > > > It requires something that answers the question "what font would we > > use for this codepoint if it was not an emoji?". Maybe we can have a > > separate fontset that pretends that the emoji script is equivalent to > > symbol? Or invent some kind of 'text-presentation-font' property to > > put somewhere? > > I'm not sure I understand why we don't select the right font by > default. Selecting a non-Emoji font for a non-Emoji codepoints should > not need any special tricks. Actually, I don't understand why there's an issue here with font selection. Are you saying that using Noto Color Emoji with CHAR+0xFE0E, when CHAR is an Emoji character, doesn't produce the textual representation of CHAR? If so, isn't that a problem with the font? I thought all we needed to do was to hand the combination to an Emoji-aware font, and the font would do the rest. Now you seem to be saying that we somehow need to select a non-Emoji font? But if so, who'd guarantee that a font that cannot display Emoji will know what to do with the combination CHAR+0xFE0E?