On 5/11/2021 2:08 PM, Jairo A. del Rio wrote:
Hi, list! Following this thread: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/596610/how-to-use-luatex-with-large-...
https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/596610/how-to-use-luatex-with-large-...,
I tried to replicate it in ConTeXt. Both LMTX and LMTX fail to display the right symbol and, as it's discussed in the linked page, there's an offset by 14. Is this intentional (in ConTeXt)? A bug?
Hi! As the original poster of the stackexchange question, I have found this thread and I am quite grateful for your attention on the topic! In fact, I am a LaTeX user and this is just one more reason why I am quite grateful to the ConTeXt community, since some progress that is recently being enjoyed in LaTeX including the nice support for unicode fonts derives from ConTeXt, I understand. I would like to add a pointer to the thread at https://github.com/latex3/luaotfload/issues/185#issuecomment-839640563. For luaotfload the issue is currently being marked as wontfix, since the relevant code and the node shaper come from ConTeXt. If some improvement is made in ConTeXt, I am pretty sure that luaotfload will benefit from it though and I would like to thank in advance! I already see progress on retaining the glyph names is being made. It is my understanding (please correct me if I am wrong) that the visible issues get triggered by multiple circumstances playing together at once: - the fact that the current codebase does a name-based remapping of glyphs also for glyphs that are explicitly PUA-encoded; - the fact that some errors with some glyphnames in the ttf font cause the current code-base to drop the names so that the chars cannot be accessed by name; - the fact that some naming mistake seems to be present in the ttf font (at least with respect to the tabled codepoint-glyphname-glyphappearance) actually introducing some duplicates. If this is correct, I wonder if it can make sense to open an issue on the font development site (and maybe keep today's version of the ttf as a test case should there be some change in ConTeXt wrt the glyph name handling and remapping). Best Sergio