kc3-lang/harfbuzz/docs/usermanual-clusters.xml

Branch - branch -main

• Show log

  Commit

• Hash : 96d9e862
  Author :
  Date : 2023-02-09T12:53:17
  

  [docs] Improve cluster-level docs
  

Download

• docs/usermanual-clusters.xml

• <?xml version="1.0"?>
  <!DOCTYPE book PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.3//EN"
                 "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.3/docbookx.dtd" [
    <!ENTITY % local.common.attrib "xmlns:xi  CDATA  #FIXED 'http://www.w3.org/2003/XInclude'">
    <!ENTITY version SYSTEM "version.xml">
  ]>
  <chapter id="clusters">
    <title>Clusters</title>
    <section id="clusters-and-shaping">
      <title>Clusters and shaping</title>
      <para>
        In text shaping, a <emphasis>cluster</emphasis> is a sequence of
        characters that needs to be treated as a single, indivisible
        unit. A single letter or symbol can be a cluster of its
        own. Other clusters correspond to longer subsequences of the
        input code points &mdash; such as a ligature or conjunct form
        &mdash; and require the shaper to ensure that the cluster is not
        broken during the shaping process.
      </para>
      <para>
        A cluster is distinct from a <emphasis>grapheme</emphasis>,
        which is the smallest unit of meaning in a writing system or
        script.
      </para>
      <para>
        The definitions of the two terms are similar. However, clusters
        are only relevant for script shaping and glyph layout. In
        contrast, graphemes are a property of the underlying script, and
        are of interest when client programs implement orthographic 
        or linguistic functionality.
      </para>
      <para>
        For example, two individual letters are often two separate
        graphemes. When two letters form a ligature, however, they
        combine into a single glyph. They are then part of the same
        cluster and are treated as a unit by the shaping engine &mdash;
        even though the two original, underlying letters remain separate
        graphemes.
      </para>
      <para>
        HarfBuzz is concerned with clusters, <emphasis>not</emphasis>
        with graphemes &mdash; although client programs using HarfBuzz
        may still care about graphemes for other reasons from time to time.
      </para>
      <para>
        During the shaping process, there are several shaping operations
        that may merge adjacent characters (for example, when two code
        points form a ligature or a conjunct form and are replaced by a
        single glyph) or split one character into several (for example,
        when decomposing a code point through the
        <literal>ccmp</literal> feature). Operations like these alter
        clusters; HarfBuzz tracks the changes to ensure that no clusters
        get lost or broken during shaping. 
      </para>
      <para>
        HarfBuzz records cluster information independently from how
        shaping operations affect the individual glyphs returned in an
        output buffer. Consequently, a client program using HarfBuzz can
        utilize the cluster information to implement features such as:
      </para>
      <itemizedlist>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  Correctly positioning the cursor within a shaped text run,
  	  even when characters have formed ligatures, composed or
  	  decomposed, reordered, or undergone other shaping operations.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  Correctly highlighting a text selection that includes some,
  	  but not all, of the characters in a word. 
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  Applying text attributes (such as color or underlining) to
  	  part, but not all, of a word.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  Generating output document formats (such as PDF) with
  	  embedded text that can be fully extracted.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  Determining the mapping between input characters and output
  	  glyphs, such as which glyphs are ligatures.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  Performing line-breaking, justification, and other
  	  line-level or paragraph-level operations that must be done
  	  after shaping is complete, but which require examining
  	  character-level properties.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
      </itemizedlist>
    </section>
    <section id="working-with-harfbuzz-clusters">
      <title>Working with HarfBuzz clusters</title>
      <para>
        When you add text to a HarfBuzz buffer, each code point must be
        assigned a <emphasis>cluster value</emphasis>.
      </para>
      <para>
        This cluster value is an arbitrary number; HarfBuzz uses it only
        to distinguish between clusters. Many client programs will use
        the index of each code point in the input text stream as the
        cluster value. This is for the sake of convenience; the actual
        value does not matter.
      </para>
      <para>
        Some of the shaping operations performed by HarfBuzz &mdash;
        such as reordering, composition, decomposition, and substitution
        &mdash; may alter the cluster values of some characters. The
        final cluster values in the buffer at the end of the shaping
        process will indicate to client programs which subsequences of
        glyphs represent a cluster and, therefore, must not be
        separated.
      </para>
      <para>
        In addition, client programs can query the final cluster values
        to discern other potentially important information about the
        glyphs in the output buffer (such as whether or not a ligature
        was formed).
      </para>
      <para>
        For example, if the initial sequence of cluster values was:
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        0,1,2,3,4
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        and the final sequence of cluster values is:
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        0,0,3,3
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        then there are two clusters in the output buffer: the first
        cluster includes the first two glyphs, and the second cluster
        includes the third and fourth glyphs. It is also evident that a
        ligature or conjunct has been formed, because there are fewer
        glyphs in the output buffer (four) than there were code points
        in the input buffer (five).
      </para>
      <para>
        Although client programs using HarfBuzz are free to assign
        initial cluster values in any manner they choose to, HarfBuzz
        does offer some useful guarantees if the cluster values are
        assigned in a monotonic (either non-decreasing or non-increasing)
        order.
      </para>
      <para>
        For buffers in the left-to-right (LTR)
        or top-to-bottom (TTB) text flow direction,
        HarfBuzz will preserve the monotonic property: client programs
        are guaranteed that monotonically increasing initial cluster
        values will be returned as monotonically increasing final
        cluster values.
      </para>
      <para>
        For buffers in the right-to-left (RTL)
        or bottom-to-top (BTT) text flow direction,
        the directionality of the buffer itself is reversed for final
        output as a matter of design. Therefore, HarfBuzz inverts the
        monotonic property: client programs are guaranteed that
        monotonically increasing initial cluster values will be
        returned as monotonically <emphasis>decreasing</emphasis> final
        cluster values.
      </para>
      <para>
        Client programs can adjust how HarfBuzz handles clusters during
        shaping by setting the
        <literal>cluster_level</literal> of the
        buffer. HarfBuzz offers three <emphasis>levels</emphasis> of
        clustering support for this property:
      </para>
      <itemizedlist>
        <listitem>
  	<para><emphasis>Level 0</emphasis> is the default.
  	</para>
  	<para>
  	  The distinguishing feature of level 0 behavior is that, at
  	  the beginning of processing the buffer, all code points that
  	  are categorized as <emphasis>marks</emphasis>,
  	  <emphasis>modifier symbols</emphasis>, or
  	  <emphasis>Emoji extended pictographic</emphasis> modifiers,
  	  as well as the <emphasis>Zero Width Joiner</emphasis> and
  	  <emphasis>Zero Width Non-Joiner</emphasis> code points, are
  	  assigned the cluster value of the closest preceding code
  	  point from <emphasis>different</emphasis> category.
  	</para>
  	<para>
  	  In essence, whenever a base character is followed by a mark
  	  character or a sequence of mark characters, those marks are
  	  reassigned to the same initial cluster value as the base
  	  character. This reassignment is referred to as
  	  "merging" the affected clusters. This behavior is based on
  	  the Grapheme Cluster Boundary specification in <ulink
  	  url="https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr29/#Regex_Definitions">Unicode
  	  Technical Report 29</ulink>.
  	</para>
  	<para>
  	  This cluster level is suitable for code that likes to use
  	  HarfBuzz cluster values as an approximation of the Unicode
  	  Grapheme Cluster Boundaries as well.
  	</para>
  	<para>
  	  Client programs can specify level 0 behavior for a buffer by
  	  setting its <literal>cluster_level</literal> to
  	  <literal>HB_BUFFER_CLUSTER_LEVEL_MONOTONE_GRAPHEMES</literal>. 
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  <emphasis>Level 1</emphasis> tweaks the old behavior
  	  slightly to produce better results. Therefore, level 1
  	  clustering is recommended for code that is not required to
  	  implement backward compatibility with the old HarfBuzz.
  	</para>
  	<para>
  	  <emphasis>Level 1</emphasis> differs from level 0 by not merging the
  	  clusters of marks and other modifier code points with the
  	  preceding "base" code point's cluster. By preserving the
  	  separate cluster values of these marks and modifier code
  	  points, script shapers can perform additional operations
  	  that might lead to improved results (for example, coloring
  	  mark glyphs differently than their base).
  	</para>
  	<para>
  	  Client programs can specify level 1 behavior for a buffer by
  	  setting its <literal>cluster_level</literal> to
  	  <literal>HB_BUFFER_CLUSTER_LEVEL_MONOTONE_CHARACTERS</literal>. 
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  <emphasis>Level 2</emphasis> differs significantly in how it
  	  treats cluster values. In level 2, HarfBuzz never merges
  	  clusters.
  	</para>
  	<para>
  	  This difference can be seen most clearly when HarfBuzz processes
  	  ligature substitutions and glyph decompositions. In level 0
  	  and level 1, ligatures and glyph decomposition both involve
  	  merging clusters; in level 2, neither of these operations
  	  triggers a merge.
  	</para>
  	<para>
  	  Client programs can specify level 2 behavior for a buffer by
  	  setting its <literal>cluster_level</literal> to
  	  <literal>HB_BUFFER_CLUSTER_LEVEL_CHARACTERS</literal>. 
  	</para>
        </listitem>
      </itemizedlist>
      <para>
        As mentioned earlier, client programs using HarfBuzz often
        assign initial cluster values in a buffer by reusing the indices
        of the code points in the input text. This gives a sequence of
        cluster values that is monotonically increasing (for example,
        0,1,2,3,4).
      </para>
      <para>
        It is not <emphasis>required</emphasis> that the cluster values
        in a buffer be monotonically increasing. However, if the initial
        cluster values in a buffer are monotonic and the buffer is
        configured to use cluster level 0 or 1, then HarfBuzz
        guarantees that the final cluster values in the shaped buffer
        will also be monotonic. No such guarantee is made for cluster
        level 2.
      </para>
      <para>
        In levels 0 and 1, HarfBuzz implements the following conceptual
        model for cluster values:
      </para>
      <itemizedlist spacing="compact">
        <listitem>
  	<para>
            If the sequence of input cluster values is monotonic, the
  	  sequence of cluster values will remain monotonic.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
            Each cluster value represents a single cluster.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
            Each cluster contains one or more glyphs and one or more
            characters.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
      </itemizedlist>
      <para>
        In practice, this model offers several benefits. Assuming that
        the initial cluster values were monotonically increasing
        and distinct before shaping began, then, in the final output:
      </para>
      <itemizedlist spacing="compact">
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  All adjacent glyphs having the same final cluster
  	  value belong to the same cluster.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
            Each character belongs to the cluster that has the highest
  	  cluster value <emphasis>not larger than</emphasis> its
  	  initial cluster value.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
      </itemizedlist>
    </section>
  
    <section id="a-clustering-example-for-levels-0-and-1">
      <title>A clustering example for levels 0 and 1</title>
      <para>
        The basic shaping operations affect clusters in a predictable
        manner when using level 0 or level 1: 
      </para>
      <itemizedlist>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  When two or more clusters <emphasis>merge</emphasis>, the
  	  resulting merged cluster takes as its cluster value the
  	  <emphasis>minimum</emphasis> of the incoming cluster values.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  When a cluster <emphasis>decomposes</emphasis>, all of the
  	  resulting child clusters inherit as their cluster value the
  	  cluster value of the parent cluster.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  When a character is <emphasis>reordered</emphasis>, the
  	  reordered character and all clusters that the character
  	  moves past as part of the reordering are merged into one cluster.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
      </itemizedlist>
      <para>
        The functionality, guarantees, and benefits of level 0 and level
        1 behavior can be seen with some examples. First, let us examine
        what happens with cluster values when shaping involves cluster
        merging with ligatures and decomposition.
      </para>
  
      <para>
        Let's say we start with the following character sequence (top row) and
        initial cluster values (bottom row):
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        A,B,C,D,E
        0,1,2,3,4
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        During shaping, HarfBuzz maps these characters to glyphs from
        the font. For simplicity, let us assume that each character maps
        to the corresponding, identical-looking glyph:
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        A,B,C,D,E
        0,1,2,3,4
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        Now if, for example, <literal>B</literal> and <literal>C</literal>
        form a ligature, then the clusters to which they belong
        &quot;merge&quot;. This merged cluster takes for its cluster
        value the minimum of all the cluster values of the clusters that
        went in to the ligature. In this case, we get:
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        A,BC,D,E
        0,1 ,3,4
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        because 1 is the minimum of the set {1,2}, which were the
        cluster values of <literal>B</literal> and
        <literal>C</literal>. 
      </para>
      <para>
        Next, let us say that the <literal>BC</literal> ligature glyph
        decomposes into three components, and <literal>D</literal> also
        decomposes into two components. Whenever a cluster decomposes,
        its components each inherit the cluster value of their parent: 
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        A,BC0,BC1,BC2,D0,D1,E
        0,1  ,1  ,1  ,3 ,3 ,4
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        Next, if <literal>BC2</literal> and <literal>D0</literal> form a
        ligature, then their clusters (cluster values 1 and 3) merge into
        <literal>min(1,3) = 1</literal>:
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        A,BC0,BC1,BC2D0,D1,E
        0,1  ,1  ,1    ,1 ,4
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        Note that the entirety of cluster 3 merges into cluster 1, not
        just the <literal>D0</literal> glyph. This reflects the fact
        that the cluster <emphasis>must</emphasis> be treated as an
        indivisible unit.
      </para>
      <para>
        At this point, cluster 1 means: the character sequence
        <literal>BCD</literal> is represented by glyphs
        <literal>BC0,BC1,BC2D0,D1</literal> and cannot be broken down any
        further.
      </para>
    </section>
    <section id="reordering-in-levels-0-and-1">
      <title>Reordering in levels 0 and 1</title>
      <para>
        Another common operation in some shapers is glyph
        reordering. In order to maintain a monotonic cluster sequence
        when glyph reordering takes place, HarfBuzz merges the clusters
        of everything in the reordering sequence.
      </para>
      <para>
        For example, let us again start with the character sequence (top
        row) and initial cluster values (bottom row):
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        A,B,C,D,E
        0,1,2,3,4
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        If <literal>D</literal> is reordered to the position immediately
        before <literal>B</literal>, then HarfBuzz merges the
        <literal>B</literal>, <literal>C</literal>, and
        <literal>D</literal> clusters &mdash; all the clusters between
        the final position of the reordered glyph and its original
        position. This means that we get:
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        A,D,B,C,E
        0,1,1,1,4
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        as the final cluster sequence.
      </para>
      <para>
        Merging this many clusters is not ideal, but it is the only
        sensible way for HarfBuzz to maintain the guarantee that the
        sequence of cluster values remains monotonic and to retain the
        true relationship between glyphs and characters.
      </para>
    </section>
    <section id="the-distinction-between-levels-0-and-1">
      <title>The distinction between levels 0 and 1</title>
      <para>
        The preceding examples demonstrate the main effects of using
        cluster levels 0 and 1. The only difference between the two
        levels is this: in level 0, at the very beginning of the shaping
        process, HarfBuzz merges the cluster of each base character
        with the clusters of all Unicode marks (combining or not) and
        modifiers that follow it.
      </para>
      <para>
        For example, let us start with the following character sequence
        (top row) and accompanying initial cluster values (bottom row):
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        A,acute,B
        0,1    ,2
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        The <literal>acute</literal> is a Unicode mark. If HarfBuzz is
        using cluster level 0 on this sequence, then the
        <literal>A</literal> and <literal>acute</literal> clusters will
        merge, and the result will become:
      </para>
      <programlisting>
        A,acute,B
        0,0    ,2
      </programlisting>
      <para>
        This merger is performed before any other script-shaping
        steps.
      </para>
      <para>
        This initial cluster merging is the default behavior of the
        Windows shaping engine, and the old HarfBuzz codebase copied
        that behavior to maintain compatibility. Consequently, it has
        remained the default behavior in the new HarfBuzz codebase.
      </para>
      <para>
        But this initial cluster-merging behavior makes it impossible
        for client programs to implement some features (such as to
        color diacritic marks differently from their base
        characters). That is why, in level 1, HarfBuzz does not perform
        the initial merging step.
      </para>
      <para>
        For client programs that rely on HarfBuzz cluster values to
        perform cursor positioning, level 0 is more convenient. But
        relying on cluster boundaries for cursor positioning is wrong: cursor
        positions should be determined based on Unicode grapheme
        boundaries, not on shaping-cluster boundaries. As such, using
        level 1 clustering behavior is recommended. 
      </para>
      <para>
        One final facet of levels 0 and 1 is worth noting. HarfBuzz
        currently does not allow any
        <emphasis>multiple-substitution</emphasis> GSUB lookups to 
        replace a glyph with zero glyphs (in other words, to delete a
        glyph).
      </para>
      <para>
        But, in some other situations, glyphs can be deleted. In
        those cases, if the glyph being deleted is the last glyph of its
        cluster, HarfBuzz makes sure to merge the deleted glyph's
        cluster with a neighboring cluster.
      </para>
      <para>
        This is done primarily to make sure that the starting cluster of the
        text always has the cluster index pointing to the start of the text
        for the run; more than one client program currently relies on this
        guarantee.
      </para>
      <para>
        Incidentally, Apple's CoreText does something different to
        maintain the same promise: it inserts a glyph with id 65535 at
        the beginning of the glyph string if the glyph corresponding to
        the first character in the run was deleted. HarfBuzz might do
        something similar in the future.
      </para>
    </section>
    <section id="level-2">
      <title>Level 2</title>
      <para>
        HarfBuzz's level 2 cluster behavior uses a significantly
        different model than that of level 0 and level 1.
      </para>
      <para>
        The level 2 behavior is easy to describe, but it may be
        difficult to understand in practical terms. In brief, level 2 
        performs no merging of clusters whatsoever.
      </para>
      <para>
        This means that there is no initial base-and-mark merging step
        (as is done in level 0), and it means that reordering moves and
        ligature substitutions do not trigger a cluster merge.
      </para>
      <para>
        Only one shaping operation directly affects clusters when using
        level 2:
      </para>
      <itemizedlist>
        <listitem>
  	<para>
  	  When a cluster <emphasis>decomposes</emphasis>, all of the
  	  resulting child clusters inherit as their cluster value the
  	  cluster value of the parent cluster.
  	</para>
        </listitem>
      </itemizedlist>
      <para>
        When glyphs do form a ligature (or when some other feature
        substitutes multiple glyphs with one glyph) the cluster value
        of the first glyph is retained as the cluster value for the
        resulting ligature.
      </para>
      <para>
        This occurrence sounds similar to a cluster merge, but it is
        different. In particular, no subsequent characters &mdash;
        including marks and modifiers &mdash; are affected. They retain
        their previous cluster values. 
      </para>
      <para>
        Level 2 cluster behavior is ultimately less complex than level 0
        or level 1, but there are several cases for which processing
        cluster values produced at level 2 may be tricky. 
      </para>
      <section id="ligatures-with-combining-marks-in-level-2">
        <title>Ligatures with combining marks in level 2</title>
        <para>
  	The first example of how HarfBuzz's level 2 cluster behavior
  	can be tricky is when the text to be shaped includes combining
  	marks attached to ligatures.
        </para>
        <para>
  	Let us start with an input sequence with the following
  	characters (top row) and initial cluster values (bottom row):
        </para>
        <programlisting>
  	A,acute,B,breve,C,circumflex
  	0,1    ,2,3    ,4,5
        </programlisting>
        <para>
  	If the sequence <literal>A,B,C</literal> forms a ligature,
  	then these are the cluster values HarfBuzz will return under
  	the various cluster levels:
        </para>
        <para>
  	Level 0:
        </para>
        <programlisting>
  	ABC,acute,breve,circumflex
  	0  ,0    ,0    ,0
        </programlisting>
        <para>
  	Level 1:
        </para>
        <programlisting>
  	ABC,acute,breve,circumflex
  	0  ,0    ,0    ,5
        </programlisting>
        <para>
  	Level 2:
        </para>
        <programlisting>
  	ABC,acute,breve,circumflex
  	0  ,1    ,3    ,5
        </programlisting>
        <para>
  	Making sense of the level 2 result is the hardest for a client
  	program, because there is nothing in the cluster values that
  	indicates that <literal>B</literal> and <literal>C</literal>
  	formed a ligature with <literal>A</literal>.
        </para>
        <para>
  	In contrast, the "merged" cluster values of the mark glyphs
  	that are seen in the level 0 and level 1 output are evidence
  	that a ligature substitution took place. 
        </para>
      </section>
      <section id="reordering-in-level-2">
        <title>Reordering in level 2</title>
        <para>
  	Another example of how HarfBuzz's level 2 cluster behavior
  	can be tricky is when glyphs reorder. Consider an input sequence
  	with the following characters (top row) and initial cluster
  	values (bottom row):
        </para>
        <programlisting>
  	A,B,C,D,E
  	0,1,2,3,4
        </programlisting>
        <para>
  	Now imagine <literal>D</literal> moves before
  	<literal>B</literal> in a reordering operation. The cluster
  	values will then be:
        </para>
        <programlisting>
  	A,D,B,C,E
  	0,3,1,2,4
        </programlisting>
        <para>
  	Next, if <literal>D</literal> forms a ligature with
  	<literal>B</literal>, the output is:
        </para>
        <programlisting>
  	A,DB,C,E
  	0,3 ,2,4
        </programlisting>
        <para>
  	However, in a different scenario, in which the shaping rules
  	of the script instead caused <literal>A</literal> and
  	<literal>B</literal> to form a ligature
  	<emphasis>before</emphasis> the <literal>D</literal> reordered, the
  	result would be:
        </para>
        <programlisting>
  	AB,D,C,E
  	0 ,3,2,4   
        </programlisting>
        <para>
  	There is no way for a client program to differentiate between
  	these two scenarios based on the cluster values
  	alone. Consequently, client programs that use level 2 might
  	need to undertake additional work in order to manage cursor
  	positioning, text attributes, or other desired features.
        </para>
      </section>
      <section id="other-considerations-in-level-2">
        <title>Other considerations in level 2</title>
        <para>
  	There may be other problems encountered with ligatures under
  	level 2, such as if the direction of the text is forced to
  	the opposite of its natural direction (for example, Arabic text
  	that is forced into left-to-right directionality). But,
  	generally speaking, these other scenarios are minor corner
  	cases that are too obscure for most client programs to need to
  	worry about.
        </para>
      </section>
    </section>
  </chapter>
  

Download