117644 - “ and ” don't display quotes as expected

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Core :: Layout, defect)

Description

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.7+) Gecko/20011213
BuildID:    2001123022 (self-compiled)

In the URL mentioned above there's a text "There's not enough room ...". Around
foopy.sit and c: should be curly quotes, according to mpt.

But, “ is displayed as ´ and ” is displayed as a character similar
to a ; or an i.


Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Visit above URL
2. Maybe scroll down a bit
3. Look at wrongly displayed characters

This is on Mandrake Linux 8.1. Also occurs with nightly build 2001123121

Comment 1

[Olav Vitters]

Using Mandrake Cooker the quotes look fine to me. In Appearance->Fonts I use the
adobe fonts (adobe-times, adobe-helvetica, adobe-courier).

Comment 2

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

ok... using the adobe fonts, it works as expected. I was using monotype-times
new roman, monotype-arial and monotype-courier new; which look much better (I
think these are truetype fonts that I copied from my windows installation).

Still, shouldn't Mozilla display the correct symbols even with these fonts?

Comment 3

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

Brian, would you take this?  Or should this just got to I18N?

Comment 4

[kill this account]

-> ftang

Comment 5

[kill this account]

per ftang: --> shanjian

Comment 6

[Shanjian Li]

mozilla could not check a font's glyph and tell which one is better. But 
we do allow user to choose the right font. Isn't that enough?

Comment 7

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

So, there is nothing I can do to get a correct character display with this font?
It looks much nicer than adobe-times.

Comment 8

[kill this account]

Because moz's font display is fairly complex I recommend we get the user to 
dislay font in a separate (very simple) program. This way we can verify that 
the font is actually wrong. 

Is there a way to get xfd to display these chars?

I'm reopening this so we can verify the font has a problem.

Comment 9

[Frank Tang]

Attachment: test case

Comment 10

[Frank Tang]

Attachment: display on my RedHat 7.2 J system. Look normal- ascii transliteration by unicode compat mapping

Comment 11

[Frank Tang]

“ is U+201c ( LEFT DOUBLE QUOTATION MARK -> 0022 qutionat mark) and 
 ” is U+201d ( RIGHT DOUBLE QUOTATION MARK -> 0022 qutionat mark) 

Comment 12

[Frank Tang]

I cannot reproduce your problem (see my screen shot). can you include a screen shot?

Comment 13

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

Attachment: Screenshot of testcase

Here is the requested screenshot

Comment 14

[kill this account]

Shanjian: you'll need to find out what font are being loaded and then
find out which font the glyphs are coming from

Comment 15

[Shanjian Li]

Christian, could you set environtment variable "NS_FONT_DEBUg" to be 5, and then
post the output in console? That will allow us to identify which font is used
for these 2 chars.  thanks.

Comment 16

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

Attachment: Console Output

This is all the output, starting from when I loaded the page. Do you want the
earlier output as well?

Comment 17

[Shanjian Li]

Christian, are you sure that is the right output? I didn't see mozilla resolving
glyph for u+201c, u+201d. It is trying for u+2014, u+2026. Could you set this
test page for you home page temporily and start mozilla.  Then post everything
you got in you output screen. thanks.

Comment 18

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

Attachment: Console Output 2

I noticed now that the page has changed, which may be the reason for the
character to not appear...

I have now set the testcase of this bug as the homepage; here's the output.

Comment 19

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

I just noticed another thing: The character ’, which should presumably
display as ' also displays wrongly for me (it's displayed as a y with two dots
above it, like this: ’)

(8217 = 0x2019; which is part of the original console output, afaict)

Comment 20

[Shanjian Li]

I was wondering the problem might be caused by bad fonts. iso8859-13 charset
contains u+201c and u+201d. To confirm this is not a generic problem for all
iso8859-13 fonts, I download some iso8859-13 fonts from
"http://bibliofile.mc.duke.edu/gww/fonts/Caslon/Caslon.html". I verified the
fonts works well in my browser. 

Is it possible for you to grab some kind of font viewer to check the glyph for
those 2 chars? Other options include specifying a difference font in your font
preference setting (Edit->Preference->Appearance->fonts) other than
"monotype-times new roman-iso8859-1". That will only work if you have other
8859-13 fonts available. Temporarily remove those font in you font directory
should work if you have no other choice. 

Comment 21

[kill this account]

use 'xfontset' to figure out the XLFD font name and then use 
'xfd -fn <fontname>' to display it.

Comment 22

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

OK, I found this: (I used the iso8859-13 version of monotype-times new roman, I
hope that was correct)

The character that I would expect (the Quotation Mark ") is at position 0x22
The characters that get displayed are at position 0xa1 (”) (for U+201d) and 0xb4
(“) (for U+201C)

And for ’: The character at 0xff is used, while 0x27 is correct (afaict)

I hope this is the information that you wanted

Comment 23

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

I have also tried a few other fonts, of which I have the iso8859-13 version. 
Tbe following fonts also displayed the character wrong (in the same way, btw):
bitstream-bitstream cyberbit
microsoft-georgia
linotype-palatino linotype
monotype-arial
monotype-impact
(maybe others, I haven't tried all that I have)

Comment 24

[Tristan Miller]

As Shanjian Li indicates, this is almost certainly a font problem, and not a bug
in Mozilla.  More information is available in a Usenet discussion and in Debian
bug report #141571: 

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020821175325.GA23861%40mvz.xs4all.nl
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=141571

Comment 25

[Christian :Biesinger (don't email me, ping me on IRC)]

Tristan, thanks for the links. marking INVALID.