Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 113757
Windows<=XP has problems with unicodes>U+FFFF for PS-OpenType
Last modified: 2013-08-07 14:38:26 UTC
Openoffice.org 3.2 claims to include support for PostScript-based OpenType fonts (See http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/features/3.2/#general_font). Whereas, this only partially true as apparently OOo 3.2 Writer supports only Unicode Plane 0: Basic Multilingual Plane (BMP) (U+0000 to U+FFFF) (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplementary_Ideographic_Plane#Supplementary_Ideographic_Plane). For example, the STIX Fonts Version 1.0.0 (see http://www.stixfonts.org/) PostScript-based OpenType fonts includes Unicode Plane 1: Supplementary Multilingual Plane (SMP) Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols (U+1D400 to U+1D7FF). When the STIX fonts are installed, in an OpenOffice.org Writer document, Insert>Special Characters>Font: STIXGeneral shows no characters greater than or equal to U+1D400. I.e. there is no Subset: Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols. Note that blank squares in the Special Characters array corresponding to U+1D400 to U+1D7FF can be selected. The Characters field shows blank characters and, when the Characters are inserted into the document (via the OK button), the characters entered in the document are blank <space>. That the STIXGeneral font includes glyphs for U+1D400 to U+1D7FF is apparent from the STIXv1.0.0\Glyphs\STIXGeneral.otf.pdf file in the STIX Full Download (see http://www.aip.org/stixfonts/font_download.jsp). NOTE: The STIX Documentation (PDF file, see http://www.stixfonts.org/STIXFontReleaseDocumentation2010.pdf) Known Issues predicts this problem: "Currently there is limited support for glyphs/characters in Unicode Plane 1. This lack of support is not a font issue but rather an issue with the rendering software (e.g., browser, word processor, etc.)."
@HDU: I see this as an enhancement. Maybe one more leaf on big tree of issue 102943? Or just a duplicate? Your opinion?
Reading msgNo=102943, I don't have enough knowledge to comment on the overall issues re sal_Unicodes. However, reading the additional comments from sb Mon Jun 22 10:34:10 +0000 2009, regarding msgNo=18462, Subject: Unicode---Give us all of it!, apparently OOo was initially written to support only Unicode Plane 0: Basic Multilingual Plane (BMP) (U+0000 to U+FFFF) and a lot of modules might need to be modified to support other Unicode planes. This is unfortunate, because apparently, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplementary_Ideographic_Plane#Supplementary_Ideographic_Plane, apparently Plane 1, the Supplementary Multilingual Plane (SMP), is also used for currently valid symbols, including musical and mathematical, as well as historical symbols. The fact that the OOo Formula can't take advantage of the STIX Plane 1: Supplementary Multilingual Plane (SMP) Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols (U+1D400 to U+1D7FF) should be a concern, since the STIX fonts were created by consortium of publishers of mathematical, scientific, and technical books and journals to serve the scientific and engineering community in the process from manuscript creation through final publication, both in electronic and print formats. Also, OOo the STIX fonts will support OOo competitors: "Additional OpenType features will be added in the second release which will allow using the font in Microsoft Office applications such as Word 2010. The third release will add LaTeX support." (See http://www.stixfonts.org/.) So, first and foremost, as I want to use the STIX fonts, of course I think that this issue is important, as I really don't want to use Microsoft Word or LaTex to write my mathematics and scientific documents. Secondly, I disagree that this issue is an "enhancement", because the Special Characters dialog allows the selection of U+1D400 to U+1D7FF symbols, which it shouldn't do, so I call this a bug. Thirdly, the OOo 3.2 documentation claims support for PostScript-based OpenType fonts, which implies all of the Unicode Planes and doesn't say only Plane 0.
WinXP's ATM Light seems to have a problem with codepoints beyond the baseplane. It works on UNX, MAC and WIN7, maybe even on Win6 (anyone care to check there?). Of course we could work around such limitations of the platform by reimplementing these parts that weren't fully done by the platform provider in the many years of its maintenance. That would be an unwise use of resources though unless there was extremely urgent demand.
Adjusting the issue status to somewhere between "INVALID" (the platform is the problem) and "STARTED" (a workaround would be possible).