search

w3c / clreq

Requirements for Chinese Text Layout
https://www.w3.org/International/clreq/
Other
728 stars 61 forks source link

Glyph of punctuations #410

Closed xfq closed 2 years ago

xfq commented 3 years ago

一些系统字体下的字形与我们文档里的推荐字形不符，是否需要体现到我们的差距分析文档里？

例子：

间隔号 U+00B7 MIDDLE DOT [·] 的字宽也有一些问题。

xfq commented 2 years ago

English translation:

The glyphs in some system fonts do not match the recommended glyphs in our document. Do they need to be reflected in our gap analysis document?

Examples:

The width of interpuncts U+00B7 MIDDLE DOT [·] is also problematic in some fonts.

xfq commented 2 years ago

The root cause of this problem is that some Chinese and Western punctuations share the same code points.

xfq commented 2 years ago

Filed https://github.com/w3c/clreq/issues/430

acli commented 2 years ago

Unless we can persuade Unicode to de-unify these code points, IMHO most of these are unsolvable problems caused by Unicode’s decision to “unify” code points that should never have been unified because (as you’ve pointed out) “minimal pairs” can easily be found.

These incorrect unifications are actually causing a lot of headaches for English speakers.

I can add to this list the width and spacing of curly quote marks (“‘’”). These glyphs in simplified Chinese fonts behave completely differently than the same glyphs in other fonts.

r12a commented 2 years ago

U+2026 HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS […] are not vertically centered

Chapter 6.2, pages 276-277 of v14 of the Unicode Standard suggests using ⋯ U+22EF MIDLINE HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS instead of … U+2026 HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS for CJK. There's probably a backlog of pages out there which use the ordinary ellipsis, so there's still a need for a font to correctly support the positioning, but perhaps clreq should also consider recommending the use of the midline ellipsis?

xfq commented 2 years ago

U+2026 HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS […] are not vertically centered

Chapter 6.2, pages 276-277 of v14 of the Unicode Standard suggests using ⋯ U+22EF MIDLINE HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS instead of … U+2026 HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS for CJK. There's probably a backlog of pages out there which use the ordinary ellipsis, so there's still a need for a font to correctly support the positioning, but perhaps clreq should also consider recommending the use of the midline ellipsis?

Thanks for the hint. I have filed https://github.com/w3c/clreq/issues/432 to track this.

xfq commented 2 years ago

I filed this issue to discuss whether we need to file a gap analysis issue. After discussing with @r12a, I have filed a gap analysis issue (i.e., #430), so I would like to close this issue. Discussions about the content of the gap analysis issue or the larger Unicode issue can be discussed in #430 or in other new issues.