On 2008-Aug-30 10:39:02 +0200, Marcus von Appen <mva_at_sysfault.org> wrote: >I wonder, how backspacing will be implemented for complex scripts such >as the Indic one or Arabic, where two codepoints will be resolved to one >logical (and usually visible) character. IMHO, unless we want to embed the equivalent of pango in the kernel, the only realistic solution is to count unicode codepoints. >In my opinion that'd mean either that for codepoints, which are not >rendered, either the internal unicode set is used (for Arabic this'd be >form 1) or the user-visible one (form 2). In either of those case the >backspacing might appear broken to the user. It would be useful to know how other implementations work because I can't see how to avoid some degree of broken-ness without a complete CTF implementation. If we aim syscons at sysadmins then a degree of misbehaviour may be acceptable. >Creating a useful CJK font however will mostly mean to implement around >at least 1000-2000 characters ;-). The fonts are available in ports. I'm not sure if there are existing bit-mapped fonts but a TTF or similar font can be converted to a bitmap without major effort. Antialiasing would help with legibility. -- Peter Jeremy Please excuse any delays as the result of my ISP's inability to implement an MTA that is either RFC2821-compliant or matches their claimed behaviour.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:34 UTC