Bug 187481

Summary: [or_IN]About the blwm
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: subhransu behera <sbehera>
Component: fonts-indicAssignee: Rahul Bhalerao <b.rahul.pm>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: dsantani, eng-i18n-bugs, llim
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: i18n
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2007-04-27 11:57:26 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 206581    
Attachments:
Description Flags
This is how the combination should look like
none
Verified Image none

Description subhransu behera 2006-03-31 09:41:51 UTC 
Description of problem: Problem in Below-base mark positioning (blwm)


How reproducible:

While typing in yudit (with it's inbulid inscript key map) the following
combination is not properly displayed.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Type the U+0b38 U+0b4d U+0b2e U+0b4d U+0b30 U+0b09 in yudit
  
Actual results:

Combination with overlapping characters

Expected results:

Clear view of the combination
Comment 1 subhransu behera 2006-03-31 09:41:51 UTC 
Created attachment 127116 [details]
This is how the combination should look like
Comment 2 Leon Ho 2006-08-28 06:50:45 UTC 
Does it work in gedit, evolution etc?
Comment 3 subhransu behera 2006-08-28 12:35:38 UTC 
(In reply to comment #2)
> Does it work in gedit, evolution etc?

Hi Leon 

It doesn't work with gedit or evolution !

I had tested it earlier with utkal font which gave me this combination. But for
our Lohit font the rule is not correctly defined. I have also filed a bug for
the missing glyph for this combination.

Reference Bug ID # 194066

Combination is in list no # 18
Comment 5 Rahul Bhalerao 2006-09-14 10:47:47 UTC 
The combination reported is here is wrong. The correct combination is:

   (Consonant + U0D4D + Consonant) + U0D43

Here the part which is inside bracket forms a conjunct with below base form. 
Thus when below base mark U0D43 follows, it overlaps the eairlier below base.
This is a GPOS problem. Below base anchor point pair needs to be deined for 
U0D43 and all the other below base glyphs.
Comment 6 Rahul Bhalerao 2006-09-18 07:32:55 UTC 
In above comment U0D4D and U0D43 should be respectively, U0B4D and U0B43.

This combination:
0b38 + 0b4d + ob2e + 0b43 

Now works in the latest font 2.0.1-1.
Comment 7 A S Alam 2007-04-27 11:55:41 UTC 
Created attachment 153610 [details]
Verified Image
Comment 8 A S Alam 2007-04-27 11:57:26 UTC 
verified version is:
fonts-oriya-2.1.5-1.fc7