[XeTeX] XeTeX 0.9999.0 released

Khaled Hosny khaledhosny at eglug.org
Mon Mar 18 12:00:52 CET 2013

On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:11:18AM +0100, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> 2013/3/16 Khaled Hosny <khaledhosny at eglug.org>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I can not really tell if this is a bug or a feature, bug HarfBuzz
> > normalization is independent of input normalization to technically the
> > input text is not normalised, but it makes little difference with the
> > PDF output.
> >
> > If you still think this is an issue, please raise it again on HarfBuzz
> > mailing list since your old message went unanswered.
> I know nothing about Chinese but as I know, in Devanagari characters
> with nukta as QA, ZA, FA (and a few others) exist as glyphs with their
> own codepoints but can also be entered as KA, JA, PHA with combining
> nukta. As I read somewhere, some fonts contain QA, ZA, FA, some fonts
> do not. If JA + nukta is normalised to ZA but ZA does not exist in the
> font, the character could not be rendered. NFD may be equally bad, if
> ZA is decomposed to JA + nukta and the font does not contain nukta,
> the character could not be rendered. So it may be an issue but I do
> not know whether such problems may occur in nowadays' fonts. Similar
> problem may occur even in latin scripts with combining diacritical
> marks. The accented glyphs need not exists. Nowadays' fonts contain
> all accented characters needed for languages as Czech, Slovak, Polish,
> French but I do not know how widely Vietnamese is supported.
HarfBuzz takes account of what glyphs exist in the font when choosing
the normalization strategy, so such issue should not occur, if it does
then it is a bug and let us know about it.


More information about the XeTeX mailing list