When seeing U+2044 FRACTION SLASH in the text, find decimal
digits (Unicode General Category Decimal_Number) around it,
and mark the pre-slash digits with 'numr' feature, the post-slash
digits with 'dnom' feature, and the whole sequence with 'frac'
feature.
This beautifully renders fractions with major Windows fonts,
and any other font that implements those features (numr/dnom is
enough for most fonts.)
Not the fastest way to do this, but good enough for a start.
CoreText does automatic font fallback (AKA "cascading") for characters
not supported by the requested font, and provides no way to turn it off,
so detect if the returned run uses a font other than the requested one
and fill in the buffer with .notdef glyphs instead of random indices
glyph from a different font.
The spec and Uniscribe don't allow these, but UTN#11
specifically says the sequence U+104B,U+1038 is valid.
As such, allow all "P V" sequences. There's about
eight sequences that match that structure, but Roozbeh
thinks it's fine to allow all of them.
Test case: U+104B, U+1038
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71947
The spec and Uniscribe treat it as consonant in the grammar, but
it's not in IndicSyllableCategory.txt, so fix up.
Test sequence: U+1004,U+103A,U+1039,U+104E
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71948
This is broken sequence according to OpenType spec, Uniscribe,
and current HarfBuzz implementation. But Roozbeh says this
is a valid sequence, so allow it. There are multiple
"(DB As?)?" constructs in the grammar, but Roozbeh thinks only
this one needs changing.
Test case: 1014,1063,103A
Fixes https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71949
Based on research into latest SIL and Windows fonts, pulling in
the latest OpenType language tag proposal from Microsoft, and updating
to latest language tags and names from ISO 639.
This reverts commit d5bd0590ae.
The reasoning behind that logic was flawed and made under
a misunderstanding of the original problem, and caused
regressions as reported by Jonathan Kew in thread titled
"tibetan marks" in Oct 2013. Apparently I have had fixed
the original problem with this commit:
7e08f1258d
So, revert the faulty commit and everything seems to be in good
shape.
For Javanese (pref_len == 1) only reorder if it didn't ligate. That's
sensible, and what the spec says. For other Indic (pref_len > 1)
only reorder if ligated.
Doesn't change any test numbers.