On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org> wrote: > > > Another is a worry whether we can really effectively split the world into > semantically-perceived and visually-perceived characters - especially given > the 'etc' that appears in the definition where we list appropriate > operations for each. For example, are we sure that first-letter operations > require semantically- rather than visually-perceived characters in all > cases? Where does cursor movement fit here? etc. > characters (eg. in the Thai case)? The fundamental split, in my view, is between characters and glyphs. There are operations that are best understood as working on clusters of characters and there are operations that are best understood as working on clusters of glyphs. I would argue that cursor movement and line-breaking are character-level operations, whereas first-letter operations and letter-spacing are glyph-level operations. For example, in Thai the boundary following a first-letter or the boundary where letter-space is to be inserted sometimes does not correspond to a boundary between characters. James
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2014 17:05:25 UTC