- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 15:35:04 +0100
- To: public-i18n-core@w3.org
- Cc: SVG WG <w3c-svg-wg@w3.org>
Dear I18N Core WG, I am writing to you on behalf of the SVG WG. We have added support for editable text to the SVG Tiny 1.2 specification, which entails that during edition, a caret would typically be available (in visual media) for the user to know the current editing position in the text. Since we also support ligatures (including in SVG fonts), we were wondering how the caret should interact with them. Let's assume that the user is editing the word "donkey", and that the "nke" characters were ligatured so as to render as an "X", giving us "doXy". The user has the caret after the "o", like so: do|Xy. If she moves the caret one step further (in this case, to the right), what should happen? We can see several options: - the caret moves straight to after the glyph: doX|y. This is unintuitive for, say, an "fi" ligature, but may be the best option for some scripts. - same as the above, but script/language dependent so that it's (almost) always intuitive. - the caret doesn't move until it has been advanced (say, using the right arrow key) as many times as there are characters in the ligature. For instance, if the caret would conceptually be on "don| key" or "donk|ey" the rendering would still be "do|Xy". We believe that this is not a very intuitive option. - each time the caret is advanced, it progresses by the advance of the ligature glyph divided by the number of characters. This has the advantage that the user gets feedback for her actions, but we suspect that the result may be completely wrong in some situations. - we leave it completely up to implementations, hoping they'll get it right. Note that everywhere in the above that concerns itself with advancing the caret would be expected to work conversely when it is moving backwards as well. We would greatly appreciate your guidance in this issue. Thanks! -- Robin Berjon Senior Research Scientist Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Wednesday, 2 November 2005 14:35:07 UTC