3 ms·
Characters in context are printable or non-printable/formatting marks right? I agree they probably meant grapheme clusters, but grapheme clusters can vary drama
by arcticbull 3y ago
Characters in context are printable or non-printable/formatting marks right? I agree they probably meant grapheme clusters, but grapheme clusters can vary dramatically in width so the point of the conversation was to explain why a bounding box was a better approximation of their goals.
- cameldrv 3y agoThey do very in width, but with a proportional font that’s true even with ASCII text. What grapheme clusters tells you is how many times you have to press the arrow key/backspace to get to the beginning of the string.
- tsimionescu 3y agoOnly if the text editor made some bad assumptions. You're forgetting about non-printable characters, such as the LTR mark. These are not part of grapheme clusters (or are their own grapheme cluster), but the cursor shouldn't probably stop at them.
- arcticbull 3y agoYou know it's been a long time since this conversation but I think, reflecting, it has to do with grapheme clusters not being particularly consistent across operating systems and over time. The article even has an example where one Unicode spec encodes the same 5 USVs and either 1 or 2 graphemes.
- eviks 3y ago> grapheme clusters can vary dramatically so do 'www' and 'iii' (though less dramatically), that't not a foreign concept to designers, not sure they'd want to bound 'www' to the width of 'iii'