Use compatible checkbox marker glyphs#840
Conversation
|
It was actually an intentional decision to avoid ■ and □. Those two glyphs have an "ambiguous" "East-Asian Width". MS Gothic for instance: 
As you can see there, these two characters are not 1 cell wide. What we could use is U+25FC BLACK MEDIUM SQUARE ◼ and U+25FB WHITE MEDIUM SQUARE ◻. Apart from these, it's not looking too good, I think. |
|
Thanks for the context. I switched the markers to U+25FC / U+25FB and verified the updated build locally. |
|
It is unfortunately necessary to test these new glyphs vs the old ones on a variety of terminals and fonts. If you could test at least a subset of that, it would help me a lot! |
|
I tested the new glyphs against the old ones on a subset of terminals and fonts. macOS:
Fonts tested:
Windows:
Fonts tested:
I didn't notice any obvious rendering issues in this subset. |
2 participants
Summary
Fixes #747.
🗹(U+1F5F9 BALLOT BOX WITH BOLD CHECK) with■(U+25A0 BLACK SQUARE).☐(U+2610 BALLOT BOX) with□(U+25A1 WHITE SQUARE).■/□pair also improves visual consistency between checked and unchecked states.Happy to use a different marker pair if maintainers prefer another option.
Test plan