On 6/13/2021 9:42 PM, Richard Mahoney wrote:
I'm wondering if there has been a regression in the rendering of CJK recently? I'm attaching two screenshots from the same code: one with lmtx-20210509 (correct); and the other lmtx-20210613 (incomplete). no, it's a side effect of something else (which shows up with these extremeely large fonts > 65k glyphs) .. i'll look into it tomorrow I uploaded a new lmtx ... kind of experimental because I changes some of
On 6/13/2021 10:54 PM, Hans Hagen wrote: the background bist that deals with embedding. The problem is that we need to deal with the previously reported clash between different unicode entries that share shapes (normally no issue but in this case it was a side effect of 'effective' monospaces where the font decided that invisible shapes should he visual anyway) as well as with the fact that soem cjk fonts have many duplicates which makes us cross the 65 boundary. The variant approach is ok but I might have overlooked some soecial cases. Because this also drops 'stream compatibility' between mkiv and lmtx (which had already become somewhat loose) I can now also clean up (simplify) some other parts of the font system but let's do that stepwise (I'm in no hurry here). Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------