From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David De La Harpe Golden Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How Firefox shows characters missing in font Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 20:52:12 +0100 Message-ID: <4A4FB2EC.7060509@harpegolden.net> References: <4A4F8980.4090706@gnu.org> <4A4FADD6.6080604@harpegolden.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1246737155 25573 80.91.229.12 (4 Jul 2009 19:52:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 19:52:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs-Devel devel , Jason Rumney To: Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 04 21:52:28 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MNBHe-00044C-Gq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2009 21:52:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50934 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MNBHd-0002mv-Fx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:52:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MNBHZ-0002mq-PD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:52:21 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MNBHV-0002me-9N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:52:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37312 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MNBHV-0002mb-4l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:52:17 -0400 Original-Received: from harpegolden.net ([65.99.215.13]:48313) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MNBHT-00039D-Ff; Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:52:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [87.198.47.196] (87-198-47-196.ptr.magnet.ie [87.198.47.196]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "David De La Harpe Golden", Issuer "David De La Harpe Golden Personal CA rev 3" (verified OK)) by harpegolden.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B81827E; Sat, 4 Jul 2009 20:52:14 +0100 (IST) User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090701) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:112022 Archived-At: Lennart Borgman wrote: > Would not that be much more work when using the existing "SIL Unicode > BMP Fallback Font"? Well, that depends. I was thinking of the "emacs draws the hexdigits in the boxes itself" case - Only need to come up with 16 tiny glyphs a few times, once you go beyond 6x8 or maybe 8x10 of pixel space available per hexdigit it probably makes some sense to just use an ordinary font rendering call for each hexdigit, and below 3x4 you really only could put in vague indicative dots/blobs anyway. Mind you, I guess using the SIL Unicode BMP fallback font gives you subpixel rendering of the hexdigits for free. But of course it's only done for the BMP.