https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262410
--- Comment #7 from Akira TAGOH <ta...@redhat.com> --- > FWIW Noto Sans Arabic doesn't have alphabet glyphs. apparently libass is > falling back to reuder alphabets. though Noto Sans and Noto Sans Arabic has > same outline for numeric characters. If mpv use Noto Sans as a fallback, the > rendering should be like your screenshot. I suspect something may went wrong > in libass. Doh. I meant: FWIW Noto Sans Arabic doesn't have alphabet glyphs. apparently libass is falling back to RENDER alphabets. though Noto Sans and Noto Sans Arabic has same outline for numeric characters. If mpv use Noto Sans as a fallback, the rendering should NOT be like your screenshot. I suspect something may went wrong in libass. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262410 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202262410%23c7 -- _______________________________________________ fonts-bugs mailing list -- fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to fonts-bugs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
