1647969 - Cannot copy two consecutive emojis from a phabricator comment

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Core :: Layout: Text and Fonts, defect)

Description

[Mayank Bansal]

1. Use nightly.
2. Go to https://phabricator.services.mozilla.com/D80201#2448455
3. Select the two emojis. (Notice that you cant select the second emoji alone)
4. Copy the emojis and paste it into some text box

AR: Only the first emoji is pasted
ER: both should be pasted

Chrome doesnt even display the second emoji to me, so I guess we are doing better

Comment 1

[Mayank Bansal]

this has nothing to do with the shared font thing. With font sharing on/off, I see similar behaviour as described above.

The only difference is that with the shared font dsiabled, the second emoji appears as a "square box" (bug 1633254)

Comment 2

[BugBot [:suhaib / :marco/ :calixte]]

The severity field is not set for this bug.
:TYLin, could you have a look please?

For more information, please visit auto_nag documentation.

Comment 3

[Ting-Yu Lin [:TYLin] (PDT, UTC-7)]

I don't see the second emoji in the phabricator comment. The markup in the inspector looks like the following. Did I miss something?

<div class="phabricator-remarkup"><p>👍🏼</p></div>

Comment 4

[Jonathan Kew [:jfkthame]]

How this renders will depend on the font support available on your system. What's actually there is a sequence of two characters, a "thumbs up" emoji U+1F44D and a skin-tone modifier U+1F3FC. On systems where the skin tone modifier is supported, these will combine to form a single thumbs-up glyph with a medium skin (FITZPATRICK TYPE-3); but if such combinations aren't supported, they will appear as two glyphs, a thumbs-up glyph with its default color and a representation of the skin-tone glyph, probably just as a color swatch.

You can't select them individually because they are conceptually a single unit (kind of like a character + diacritic), and are selected/copied/pasted as such.

Comment 5

[Ting-Yu Lin [:TYLin] (PDT, UTC-7)]

Ah, comment 4 answers my question The expected result is that both characters are selected / pasted together, but the actual result in comment 0 is that only the first character is pasted. Do we want to fix this when the combinations are not supported?

Comment 6

[Mayank Bansal]

(In reply to Jonathan Kew (:jfkthame) from comment #4)

How this renders will depend on the font support available on your system. What's actually there is a sequence of two characters, a "thumbs up" emoji U+1F44D and a skin-tone modifier U+1F3FC. On systems where the skin tone modifier is supported, these will combine to form a single thumbs-up glyph with a medium skin (FITZPATRICK TYPE-3); but if such combinations aren't supported, they will appear as two glyphs, a thumbs-up glyph with its default color and a representation of the skin-tone glyph, probably just as a color swatch.

You can't select them individually because they are conceptually a single unit (kind of like a character + diacritic), and are selected/copied/pasted as such.

What do I need to do to view the 2 emojis as a single thumbsup with a medium skin tone?

Comment 7

[Mayank Bansal]

Attachment: emoji.png

Comment 8

[Jonathan Kew [:jfkthame]]

(In reply to Mayank Bansal from comment #6)

(In reply to Jonathan Kew (:jfkthame) from comment #4)

How this renders will depend on the font support available on your system. What's actually there is a sequence of two characters, a "thumbs up" emoji U+1F44D and a skin-tone modifier U+1F3FC. On systems where the skin tone modifier is supported, these will combine to form a single thumbs-up glyph with a medium skin (FITZPATRICK TYPE-3); but if such combinations aren't supported, they will appear as two glyphs, a thumbs-up glyph with its default color and a representation of the skin-tone glyph, probably just as a color swatch.

You can't select them individually because they are conceptually a single unit (kind of like a character + diacritic), and are selected/copied/pasted as such.

What do I need to do to view the 2 emojis as a single thumbsup with a medium skin tone?

Remove the old version of Segoe UI Emoji that I believe you still have installed. (You can do this from Settings / Personalization / Fonts; it doesn't seem to be possible to do it from the Control Panel / Fonts view.)

What's happening is that for the thumbs-up glyph, Firefox font fallback is finding the older version of the font; but then that version doesn't support the skin-tone modifier, so it switches to the new version. But because the two characters are assigned different fonts, the OpenType rule that should combine them (which is only present in the new font, of course) doesn't apply.

(In reply to Ting-Yu Lin [:TYLin] (UTC-7) from comment #5)

Ah, comment 4 answers my question The expected result is that both characters are selected / pasted together, but the actual result in comment 0 is that only the first character is pasted. Do we want to fix this when the combinations are not supported?

The actual result is that both characters are pasted, but if the context into which they're pasted uses an emoji font (version) where the combination is supported, the two characters will combine and appear as a single glyph.

Comment 9

[Mayank Bansal]

@jfk : uninstalling the older Segoe UI EMoji font solved this isssue.
Is there anything actionable from Nightly?If not, feel free to close this bug.

Comment 10

[Jonathan Kew [:jfkthame]]

Yeah, I don't think there's really anything to do here, it was just a weird behavior resulting from having two different versions of the same font installed. Somewhat related to bug 1633254, though in that case there was a specific issue (some emojis not displaying at all, just showing boxes) that we were able to fix.

In this case, either form of display -- as one glyph with the medium skin tone, or as two glyphs -- is a "valid" rendering of the text, depending which font happens to get used, and there's no clear basis for Firefox to control which one it gets. If that erratic behavior is not wanted, the solution is to not install multiple different versions of the same font face.

Glad we could figure out what's going on here. :)