Re: [XeTeX] Discretionary line-breaks in Tamil

2019-09-30 Thread Suki Venkat
Exactly! That's how all the browsers seems to behave anyway, i.e., treating 200B as potential point for a line-break, even if it is not defined in the font. Suki On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:55 AM Mike Maxwell wrote: > On 9/29/2019 3:02 PM, Suki Venkat wrote: > > Then went on to hack the hyph-ta.t

Re: [XeTeX] Discretionary line-breaks in Tamil

2019-09-30 Thread Roland Kuhn via XeTeX
From a programmer’s perspective it is usually much nicer to not have special cases: if U+200B were just a space (i.e. eligible for line breaks) then the rest would follow normally. Now, it could make sense to retrofit a font during font loading with a trivial definition of U+200B if it does not

Re: [XeTeX] Discretionary line-breaks in Tamil

2019-09-30 Thread Ulrike Fischer
Am Sun, 29 Sep 2019 19:26:37 +0900 schrieb Yannis Haralambous: >> that discretionary. Better solution would be to redefine \hyphenchar >> of the font as an invisible character with a sero width. I am not sure > > Beware that the glyph must exist in the font, you cannot just use an arbitrary > uno

Re: [XeTeX] Discretionary line-breaks in Tamil

2019-09-30 Thread Philip Taylor
Ulrike Fischer wrote: Doesn't seem to be the case: This here breaks at the 200B without problem, despite the fact that latin modern hasn't it (there is a missing glyph message in the log): \documentclass{article} \textwidth=1mm \begin{document} \hyphenchar\font="200B a aa200baa a \e

Re: [XeTeX] Discretionary line-breaks in Tamil

2019-09-30 Thread Ulrike Fischer
Am Mon, 30 Sep 2019 22:23:56 +0100 schrieb Philip Taylor: >> Doesn't seem to be the case: >> >> This here breaks at the 200B without problem, despite the fact that >> latin modern hasn't it (there is a missing glyph message in the >> log): >> >> \documentclass{article} >> \textwidth=1mm >> \begin{

Re: [XeTeX] Discretionary line-breaks in Tamil

2019-09-30 Thread Philip Taylor
Ulrike Fischer wrote: plain uses a legacy font (cmr10), latex lmroman10-regular.otf. But both lack a glyph at U+200B; is it therefore the case that Latin Roman /includes/ U+200B in its repertoire but does not populate it, whilst Computer Modern excludes everything above U+00FF?

Re: [XeTeX] Discretionary line-breaks in Tamil

2019-09-30 Thread Bruno Le Floch
Perhaps try adding the following early enough in your document (before any use of U+200B). \catcode"200B=13 % (active) \def 200b{\discretionary{}{}{}} Regards, Bruno On 9/30/19 1:05 PM, Roland Kuhn via XeTeX wrote: > From a programmer’s perspective it is usually much nicer to not have > spec

Re: [XeTeX] Discretionary line-breaks in Tamil

2019-09-30 Thread Ulrike Fischer
Am Mon, 30 Sep 2019 22:35:57 +0100 schrieb Philip Taylor: >> plain uses a legacy font (cmr10), latex lmroman10-regular.otf. > But both lack a glyph at U+200B; is it therefore the case that Latin > Roman /includes/ U+200B in its repertoire but does not populate it, > whilst Computer Modern exc

Re: [XeTeX] Discretionary line-breaks in Tamil

2019-09-30 Thread Taylor, P
Ulrike Fischer wrote: different code pathes in xetex - cmr10 is not handled by harfbuzz. Thank you, Ulrike — I never knew that. New demonstration file follows : % !TeX Program=XeTeX \hsize = 1 mm \def \doit #1% {% \leftline {#1} \hyphenchar \font = "200B