[Standards] XEP-0301 Real-Time Text: Unicode normalization, bidirectional, right-to-left text, etc. -- Comments needed
markybox at gmail.com
Tue Jul 3 23:10:38 UTC 2012
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im>wrote:
> > A minor edit to to clarify this for multiple characters forming one
> > glyph, is to add "incompletely formed glyphs" to the list in the
> > paranthesis. Would that make sense?
> Do you mean multiple code points forming one character? I still find the
> use of the term 'glyph' confusing here and would prefer to leave it out
> if possible, because it doesn't seem that we're really talking about
> "The actual, concrete image of a glyph representation having been
> rasterized or otherwise imaged onto some display surface." I think it's
> best if RTT talks about characters and code points.
Yes -- that is what I meant.
I'll replace the word glyph with character. The problem is I am trying to
be consistent with what "character" means. RFC6365 has multiple
interpretations for the word "character", too. Is it a code point? Is it
a displayable character? Is it the 'char' data type (which can be 1, 2 or
4 bytes each depending on platform)? Therefore, I like to avoid using the
word "character" outside the context of a Unicode code point, this is how
XEP-0301 defines a character as.
However, I've now removed the word "glyph" from the document.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards