After fixing bug 166011, we now have layout support for script type hinting. We should build upon this feature to implement the OOXML w:hint attribute. Support for w:hint is necessary in order to correctly emulate the OOXML two-step algorithm for font slot character classification. See ECMA-376-1:2016 17.3.2.26 for more information about that algorithm.
Let's set to NEW.
Jonathan Clark committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "master": https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/38ae7a6e1cb9adfd3fe67be409fb7b5bcaba3c82 tdf#167297 sw: Add support for DOC/DOCX script type hinting It will be available in 26.2.0. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at https://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
Jonathan, I take it that, to faithfully reproduce the w:hint semantics, we would need to choose a different set of characters which take hints, as discussed in bug 167301? And if that is the case - should this really be marked fixed already?
For completeness of this bug, can you briefly give an example of a use of w:hint in OOXML?
Jonathan Clark committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "libreoffice-25-8": https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/9824f9feb562424ddb478dee32c76aa85db5e90e tdf#167297 sw: Add support for DOC/DOCX script type hinting It will be available in 25.8.0.2. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at https://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
Created attachment 201812 [details] Example DOCX
Created attachment 201813 [details] Example DOC
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #3) > Jonathan, I take it that, to faithfully reproduce the w:hint semantics, we > would need to choose a different set of characters which take hints, as > discussed in bug 167301? > > And if that is the case - should this really be marked fixed already? Yes. In my mind, this bug tracks I/O and mapping these attributes into our document model. The semantic differences are already known and arguably tracked by other bugs - but we could be more specific about the need for a compatibility flag for a Word-compatible script assignment/bidi algorithm (bug 129038, for instance). One thing to note: This is only applicable to CJK documents. Even though the cs value is accepted, Word doesn't use w:hint for RTL/CTL. Instead, it uses <cs/> for a hard override. We don't handle <cs/> yet.
Expanded the title somewhat to better clarify that we don't yet have the w:hint semantics.
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #9) Well, it's not quite clear, but one can at least deduce that w:hint is not fully implemented if we only have style:script-type.