[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