GNU bug report logs -
#63731
[PATCH] Support Emoji Variation Sequence 16 (FE0F) where appropriate
Previous Next
Reported by: Steven Allen <steven <at> stebalien.com>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 03:19:01 UTC
Severity: normal
Tags: fixed, patch
Fixed in version 29.1
Done: Robert Pluim <rpluim <at> gmail.com>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
> From: Robert Pluim <rpluim <at> gmail.com>
> Cc: 63731 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, steven <at> stebalien.com
> Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 15:08:08 +0200
>
> >>>>> On Sat, 03 Jun 2023 08:36:59 +0300, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> said:
>
> >> Sequence Font Result
> >> 23e9 fe0e system black box
> >> 23e9 fe0e Symbola correct text representation
> >> 23e9 fe0e NotoEmoji correct text representation
> >> 23e9 fe0e NotoColorEmoji blank
> >>
> >> And on emacs-29, Symbola and NotoEmoji compose that sequence
> >> correctly. Now I just need to persuade emacs-30 to use one of them.
>
> Eli> So you are saying that, in our default fontset, we should specify that
> Eli> #xFE0E should be displayed by Noto Emoji (with Symbola as fallback),
> Eli> and then make sure that font_range uses the same font for the likes of
> Eli> #x23E9? IOW, specify a different font for VS-15 even though is script
> Eli> is 'emoji'?
>
> Yes, that works (and we can remove VS-15 and VS-16 from the emoji
> script, so that theyʼll then be displayed via
> `glyphless-char-display-control' when theyʼre on their own).
What about the rest of VS-nn? do they need to stay in 'emoji' script,
and if so, why?
> Thanks for the suggestion Eli, I was looking at it from the wrong
> direction.
You are the one who did most of the footwork, so kudos to you.
This is simple enough to install on emacs-29, I think?
This bug report was last modified 1 year and 350 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.