- 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