groff
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Groff] Unexpected output for \(a~


From: Anthony J. Bentley
Subject: Re: [Groff] Unexpected output for \(a~
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 07:50:02 -0600

"Anthony J. Bentley" writes:
> Ingo Schwarze writes:
> > Hi Carsten,
> > 
> > Carsten Kunze wrote on Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 01:07:55PM +0100:
> > 
> > > in groff_char.7 it is specified that U+0303 is output for \(a~ but
> > > actually U+007E is output.  Why does the output (of nroff -Tutf8)
> > > differ from the specification?
> > 
> > It seems to me that you misread the documentation.  It reads:
> > 
> >   Accents
> >   -------
> > 
> >   The composite request is used to map most of the accents to non-spacing
> >   glyph names; the values given in parentheses are the original (spacing)
> >   ones.
> > 
> >   Output   Input   PostScript     Unicode         Notes
> >   -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> >   ~        \[a~]   tilde          u0303 (u007E)   tilde accent
> > 
> > That means you get U+007E when using the character directly -
> > which certainly makes sense.
> > 
> > The combining (non-spacing) variant shown before the parenthesis
> > only applies in the context of the .composite request.
> 
> When looking at this, I learned something new: U+007E is *not* the
> spacing equivalent to U+0303; U+02DC is. This effect is visible in
> groff's PDF output. In fact, an ASCII tilde gets replaced with a U+0303

s/0303/02DC/ on this last line.

> in PDF output, and must be escaped as \(ti to output a straight ASCII
> tilde. However, UTF-8 nroff(1) output seems to output U+007E for both
> \(a~ and ~ inputs.
> 
> -- 
> Anthony J. Bentley



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]