[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Glyph extents
|
From: |
Jean Abou Samra |
|
Subject: |
Re: Glyph extents |
|
Date: |
Wed, 19 Apr 2023 02:46:50 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Evolution 3.46.4 (3.46.4-1.fc37) |
Le mardi 18 avril 2023 à 17:35 -0700, Aaron Hill a écrit :
> On 2023-04-18 5:28 pm, Jean Abou Samra wrote:
> > Why are we using the ink_rect for Y extents but logical_rect for X extents?
> Kerning?
As a pedantic terminology point, I believe “kerning” is something you apply to
glyph pairs, not to individual glyphs.
Apart from that, I am wondering why we're not using logical_rect for Y, not why
we're not using ink_rect for X because that is definitely sensible.
Applying
diff --git a/lily/pango-font.cc b/lily/pango-font.cc
index f030f8b030..4eb2f03ee3 100644
--- a/lily/pango-font.cc
+++ b/lily/pango-font.cc
@@ -335,7 +335,7 @@ Pango_font::pango_item_string_stencil (PangoGlyphItem const
*glyph_item,
Box string_extent (
Interval (PANGO_LBEARING (logical_rect), PANGO_RBEARING (logical_rect)),
- Interval (-PANGO_DESCENT (ink_rect), PANGO_ASCENT (ink_rect)));
+ Interval (-PANGO_DESCENT (logical_rect), PANGO_ASCENT (logical_rect)));
string_extent.scale (scale_);
I get
Well, OK, there's a problem. The logical_rect probably includes the necessary
skip between two lines?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part