[10 mod] Built-in superscript/subscript characters don't match OpenType subs and sups
Bug #683186 reported by
Denis Moyogo Jacquerye
This bug affects 1 person
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ubuntu Font Family |
Confirmed
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
Superscript characters and subscript characters don't match semantically equivalent characters with OpenType 'sups' and 'subs' features.
Shouldn't they be identical. Shouldn't "¹⁹" be the same as "<sups>19</sups>"?
summary: |
- super/subscript characters don't match OpenType subs and sups + [10 mod] super/subscript characters don't match OpenType subs and sups |
Changed in ubuntu-font-family: | |
status: | Invalid → Confirmed |
summary: |
- [10 mod] super/subscript characters don't match OpenType subs and sups + [10 mod] Built-in superscript/subscript characters don't match OpenType + subs and sups |
To post a comment you must log in.
Denis, thanks for the well-illustrated report -- and sorry for the multi-year delay!
As far as I can tell, when an app is not using the sups/subs tables, the position and size of superscript/ subscript characters is up to the app. For example, this screenshot shows the same superscript characters in Firefox (data:text/ html;charset= UTF-8,< p style=" font-family: Ubuntu; font-size: 70;">19< sup>19< /sup>¹⁹< /p>), LibreOffice, and AbiWord. They have different position and size in all three.
So unless there's something I'm missing, this is not a problem in the font itself. If you want a particular app to use sups/subs characters automatically when available, ask the developers of that app. (I doubt they would, though, because for any glyph that wasn't in the table, the app would have to fall back to algorithmic superscript/ subscript, and the mixture would look bad.)