A first remark without looking at the details of the patch (which
looks very clean, BTW):
> character classes. The syntax is as follows:
>
> classes
> <ClassName> = A B C D E
> <EquivalentClass> = A - E
> <UppercaseAlphabet> = <EquivalentClass> F - Z
> <MostEfficient> = A - Z
> <Identifier> = - A - Z a - z
> <EquivIdentifier> = A - Z - a - z
What do you think of this syntax which reduces redundant syntactical
sugar:
classes
ClassName A B C D E;
EquivalentClass A - E;
UppercaseAlphabet @EquivalentClass
F - Z;
MostEfficient A - Z;
Identifier - A - Z a - z;
EquivIdentifier A - Z - a - z;
I think we need a trailing comma or something like that to easily
support multiline entries (which greatly enhance readability).
Additionally, we need support for handling Unicode ranges:
CJKpunct u3000 - u303F;
> Even though character classes are stored in font files, they are
> properties of the glyphs, not of the fonts. In other words, all
> instances of the glyph 'A' will have the same attributes. You
> probably want to put the same classes and attributes in every font
> file; otherwise, you will get different results based on the order
> in which fonts are loaded.
I think we can live with that restriction.
Werner
