On 28/11/2014 18:22, Martin Hosken wrote: > Is it that the Kokonor font has the diacritics as overstriking, i.e. > with a negative x-min (and probably x-max too)? This would account > for all the advance being on the base character and none on the > diacritic.
Huh. Well, in *that* case, Harfbuzz (or possibly FT) is not telling me the truth about how to position my glyphs. >> What am I doing wrong? > Allowing the PDF viewer to do shaping? So I *shouldn't* be getting two glyphs out of Harfbuzz. If I run hb-shape using the Jomolhari Tibetan font, it gives me one glyph. Aha! Looking at the Kokonor font repertoire in Font Book, it *does* have the SA/KA combination sitting right there in glyph position 318. Harfbuzz should surely be returning that to me. The other Tibetan font that comes with OS X, Kailasa, has a SA/KA combination but I still get two separate glyphs out of Harfbuzz. OS X's own font shaper *can* render Tibetan stacks properly in both Kokonor and Kailasa, as the text works fine in the browser / text editor / etc. That information must be there in the font to render the stacks correctly, but Harfbuzz is not correctly picking it up. On the page http://digitaltibetan.org/index.php/Tibetan_Fonts#Mac_OS-X_Unicode_fonts , it says "Unfortunately both Mac OS-X 10.5 and 10.6 (which supports Tibetan) and Adobe's programs support a different set of OpenType features which are required to correctly render Tibetan glyphs. So far Chris Fynn's Jomolhari ID font is the only publicly available font that supports all platforms." Are funny OpenType tables in use? I'm shocked; it looks like this might not actually be my fault at all. _______________________________________________ HarfBuzz mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
