From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ilya Zakharevich Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#19993: 25.0.50; Unicode fonts defective on Windows Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 14:08:01 -0800 Message-ID: <20150306220801.GA16266@math.berkeley.edu> References: <20150303220228.GA28969@math.berkeley.edu> <83egp4prs3.fsf@gnu.org> <20150305220502.GA4096@math.berkeley.edu> <83a8zqo15d.fsf@gnu.org> <20150306113804.GA11886@math.berkeley.edu> <83385ins3o.fsf@gnu.org> <20150306162136.GA14179@math.berkeley.edu> <83r3t1nax7.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1425679765 4752 80.91.229.3 (6 Mar 2015 22:09:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 22:09:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 19993@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 06 23:09:13 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YU0Qh-0007xF-Lo for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 23:09:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60623 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YU0Qh-0005ES-2E for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 17:09:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35113) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YU0Qc-0005DO-Te for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 17:09:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YU0QY-0006E6-SO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 17:09:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:39340) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YU0QY-0006Dz-Op for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 17:09:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YU0QY-0003Yh-AR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 17:09:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Ilya Zakharevich Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 22:09:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 19993 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 19993-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B19993.142567969513619 (code B ref 19993); Fri, 06 Mar 2015 22:09:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 19993) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Mar 2015 22:08:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37908 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YU0Pm-0003Xa-I0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 17:08:14 -0500 Original-Received: from nm23.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com ([98.136.217.6]:34729) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YU0Pj-0003XB-78 for 19993@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 17:08:12 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1425679684; bh=0Gc+ffFzlU6L8zsYLzqMvRZGnZaSWJPAz8tG/eZbCDg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=ufHo61JsEXdnvITJwO5c42Goc1+FtA+uX7h58345Rx5aB3pGItOkvUgqgznwS3zqlpx9ktaaxO9sk3LjPtDgsHvW9nAp1ojqm6ilCOquUAxg6Ng3OPrr1XeMWnxs7ypkdIZb84ESVEZgTtqq4lkUkPy6H0RmNeqCzBYWbJmSp9zj0qPr1NDmb07+aiWUSJT9MFexXksWqrpbxlCG0RaNO2TDc9mSbdZWWVUlkt8FIWc7hs66E0BHuKfRvmMnhZDMcRJRIKu7e6QE8CFjAMmfjW2SiDl3VPogZvU2Z498YmD1he6ZyeA+Kz8ihScVm6fs9h8VoKSpvv74NsypYvRUbw== Original-Received: from [98.137.12.61] by nm23.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Mar 2015 22:08:04 -0000 Original-Received: from [208.71.42.207] by tm6.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Mar 2015 22:08:04 -0000 Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp218.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Mar 2015 22:08:04 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 881101.73935.bm@smtp218.mail.gq1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: bSAqHgQVM1nEo5v4uqv6LUabo2k3xKX19gTAD4sBN0ans16 v_cPtw8_MagSmbCSf_4LvHAe0PjqoQiIRmNe1MJ7s_jqQw7aOPDGByo0BuYS W4YCB3RB3LHGQ7RRmBkIxlW4e48qDE3X7Y27cuLu8Ckgw_DxALrnehpIUn7q BV219aDrkkCZ8eGW8G0g.rV9V6qQqM9ilVBciyldkpA4F0MofJEyYyOVqe5e bGMuASmK8ZIELD6NKHx15QInx93mTj4ty0z6F5BURilhHaZmX7EIZ2poSUzq 5kuFsXhqLzpFRCEEwDdMJOVjvXa9NGYExUfYUhHf8wEmyD7adp7TUTLjNRVl FtMvfsl36q00hIvlMpIGFD7znx2BvOQSPK6I3hR5gCFzZbZBD9ZvLDTN_i.Z VISm7M92aGOl.LWk2G3wr5FqVZe_6uYVfcwtDmCUtb75xCAXcy5B9BIam_cs Ge855Qs_0Y35lqyUk0wIiO.ZXw0lVpjg7nsDpPSFIorw5cVP26ItElVlNzY0 bLh3SLvK7L4gfqf7LGoe.Ci3VUtBGB1lhmlH0ALDB X-Yahoo-SMTP: oLSY3dWswBBqoBVzCkLl_RIsw6heKMxu8wpEbARv1SU- Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83r3t1nax7.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:100202 Archived-At: On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 10:11:32PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 08:21:36 -0800 > > From: Ilya Zakharevich > > Cc: 19993@debbugs.gnu.org > > > > On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 04:00:27PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > Practically nothing “non-banal” is shown. Let me try… No U+1D49C, > > > > U+2099 ₙ, U+1D552, U+27e8 U+27e9 ⟨⟩ (just looking into my recent > > > > “real-life” file of notices). > > > > > > U+2099, U+27e8, and U+27e9 are displayed here (I have the STIX fonts > > > installed, and they are used for that). The rest indeed aren't. > > > > > Do you have fonts installed that cover these codepoints? > > > > As I said, «Unifont Smooth» has everything in BMP of v7.0. Many fonts > > (including «Symbola») have Math chars. > > Emacs on Windows needs a font to support the entire range of a script, > or else it won't use the font. It finds out which scripts are > supported by a font by looking at the fsUsb member of the > FONTSIGNATURE structure for each font. See font_supported_scripts, > and also font_matches_spec which uses it, for the details. So maybe > the fonts you have don't announce in their signature that they support > these Unicode ranges. E.g., U+1D49C is in "Mathematical ALphanumeric > Symbols", whose subrange bit is 89 -- does Symbola set this bit in its > font signature? This does not make any sense… Before we go to the details of a font structure, let’s discuss it semantically. What can it mean that a font “supports a script”? Theoretically, it may mean that • it “knows” all the characters in the script, and • has enough extra infrastructure to shape these characters into a correct glyphic representation. I may see that the second part may be described by one bit per script. But what about the first one? A repertoir of a script changes every year (sometimes several times per year). How can this be encapsulated into a bit? ------- But anyway: • I open Symbola.ttf with fontforge; • Go to Element⫽Font␣Info; • Go to OS/2; • Go to Charsets; • And there, deep in the list, “Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols” are highlighted. AND: Symbola IS listed in `font-show-log'… > Or maybe we could add some more heuristics to the code in w32font.c, > to be smarter about font selection for Symbol script. I really don't > know enough about all this stuff. I’m not sure one can fix this mess incrementally…. Ilya