https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262410
--- Comment #31 from Oleg Oshmyan <chortos(a)inbox.lv> ---
they are assigned to the same codepoint but have different shape with
GSUB. fontconfig doesn't get involved with the rendering thing at all. it is out of
the scope.
No, I mean fonts that are designed to support a single language. A font _can_
provide good support for everything at once via GSUB, but such global support
isn't all that common and more often you find that you have e.g. a Japanese
font, a mainland Chinese font and a Hong Kong Chinese font with near-identical
glyph coverage but different shapes. My impression has been that this is (at
least part of) why fonts.conf allows specifying what languages a font should be
preferred for.
Indeed, Noto Sans itself is a counterexample. I don't understand why it isn't
all a single font, but it isn't: instead, we have a myriad of language-specific
fonts with distinct names.
However, given that X is key codepoint to represent lang L, it can be
simplified because:
a. font A is missing a glyph X so it doesn't satisfy lang L.
b. font B has full overage for M so it satisfies lang L.
c. font B will be picked up if requesting lang L.
This might be useful when a lang L is requested, but again, the case here
doesn't request any particular language at all. All we know is that we need
"the `sans-serif` font". We could explicitly fetch the current system locale in
libass and ask Fontconfig to look for this language, but I guess we kinda
expected that Fontconfig already does this for substitutions/aliases on its
own.
I don't know what is it for?
Honestly, neither do I. We'll need to investigate. But that's why it scares me:
given that someone put it in place to begin with, it seems likely that it does
_something_.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262410
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...