From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rah Guzar via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#50951: 28.0.50; Urdu text is not displayed correctly Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2022 15:03:47 +0200 Message-ID: <87tu5m6jrw.fsf@zohomail.eu> References: <83mtnsc63i.fsf@gnu.org> <83sfxjbox7.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmsnwlvo.fsf@igel.home> <837devbgrl.fsf@gnu.org> <8335pjbewj.fsf@gnu.org> <83zgrr9zn1.fsf@gnu.org> <87edwq7srx.fsf_-_@gnus.org> <87y1uy6mn5.fsf@zohomail.eu> <83wnaij974.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Rah Guzar Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13579"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: mu4e 1.8.9; emacs 28.1.50 Cc: larsi@gnus.org, 50951@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 05 19:16:22 2022 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 1oVFht-0003N8-12 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2022 19:16:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46488 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oVFhs-0003e1-0T for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2022 13:16:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46566) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oVFhb-0003cU-9z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2022 13:16:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:60044) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oVFhb-0000m3-18 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2022 13:16:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oVFha-0004oR-TE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2022 13:16:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Rah Guzar Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2022 17:16:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50951 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 50951-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B50951.166239815418475 (code B ref 50951); Mon, 05 Sep 2022 17:16:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 50951) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Sep 2022 17:15:54 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48742 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oVFhR-0004ns-SN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2022 13:15:54 -0400 Original-Received: from sender11-pp-o93.zoho.eu ([31.186.226.251]:25854) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oVC0r-0002Xw-Vp for 50951@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2022 09:19:46 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1662383974; cv=none; d=zohomail.eu; s=zohoarc; b=fP9igUU9ZftSQaZI9byAKrGmUfL0NiK03wR+9swjnNPobXKUJ1kqR8JhCf7+VWVQ+vsK2rot0D+mjJFMQTvX4k8kkisuNS9WG8dm37Nq8A+dur8mleNjCTrpY8Faauvco9E1avi4kQz9QwVGPB6EB84ekHycvHFL40aFXqmip0s= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.eu; s=zohoarc; t=1662383974; h=Content-Type:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=zdHW8sWLFvSth04CE2Le7YhJxIS3CGcOjNvhKgMsHns=; b=aUL0Rj5VnY7KOFyV9RAdFtYbOIHhWq4sBR1V0RoSS2rVQ7UwpSxupOjOEtyiEVuVmCr70EhypNYYyzZW/WkVsuJ9amJHAZvpCJW4RqtNe/SuqsOjVNSD4OuqT5OcjDwf1LjXO9YThy+n+76RW+LnpuXAlKrbWyRccEuS9RoTpgM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.eu; dkim=pass header.i=zohomail.eu; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rahguzar@zohomail.eu; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1662383974; s=zoho; d=zohomail.eu; i=rahguzar@zohomail.eu; h=References:From:From:To:To:Cc:Cc:Subject:Subject:Date:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=zdHW8sWLFvSth04CE2Le7YhJxIS3CGcOjNvhKgMsHns=; b=sKDV5HnCL5RBvvqczz3ntPk9HvN2CZiS0kCJyfKW2EiV4H4x7H9AHe1TqvwEDFtb RsSVqSODL5PqeVscJ0YSZEnoi3heMEifWLQ4buOrxVQb/qKFgMg4cwcg2dv0tC9SMKc teeuLA+yV93jNU8d0e4a5o0xD27JpAvHUUUYcyII= Original-Received: from localhost (emp-89-220.eduroam.uu.se [130.238.89.220]) by mx.zoho.eu with SMTPS id 1662383972604331.52748534192517; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 15:19:32 +0200 (CEST) In-reply-to: <83wnaij974.fsf@gnu.org> X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 05 Sep 2022 13:15:52 -0400 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:241576 Archived-At: Hi Eli, Eli Zaretskii writes: > It is unclear to me why this conclusion. Emacs uses HarfBuzz, and the > only factor that could affect that, apart from selecting the font, is > the setting of the current-iso639-language variable, which AFAIR > Rahguzar tried setting with no success. At your suggestion, I tried hb-view and it renders Noto Nastaliq fine. Similarly Libre Office which also uses harfbuzz as far as I understand, also renders it fine. Which is why I said that the problem is limited to emacs. My understanding of font rendering is non-existent but visually what seems to happen is that emacs displays all the individual atoms (glyphs?) but it doesn't know how to position them relative to each other so they overlap and obscure each other. This positioning is especially tricky in Nastaliq fonts since it can require moving all of up, down, left, right. The big fonts that emacs render correctly, take care of this by prepackaging all these combinations of characters that require anything other than right to left movement as separate shapes. Sorry, if this reads as confused. > My conclusion from this is that Noto Nastaliq is not a good font for > Urdu. On an aesthetic level, I tend to agree. But linux distributions package very few Urdu fonts and it tends to be one of the few.