Scenario: Improved support for different graphics renditions [VT, SGR]

[DHowett]

Supported

Attribute	Standard	Stored	Rendered	As of	Notes
1 Intensity (Bright)	VT100	✔	✔	Always
1 Intensity (Bold Weight)	VT100	✔	✔	v1.10	#109, #5682, #2916 (comment)
2 Faint	ECMA-48 2nd	✔	✔	v1.3	#6703 / #6873
3 Italic	ECMA-48 2nd	✔	✔	v1.9	#5461
4 Underline	ECMA-48 2nd	✔	✔	Always	#6911 as of v1.3, underline is rendered per font metrics
5 Blink	VT100	✔	✔	v1.4	#7388
7 Reverse Video	VT100	✔	✔	Always
8 Conceal/Invisible	ECMA-48 2nd	✔	✔	v1.3	#6876
9 Crossed Out	ECMA-48 2nd	✔	✔	v1.3	#6205
21 Doubly Underlined	ECMA-48 3rd	✔	✔	v1.3	#2916
53 Overline	ECMA-48 4th	✔	✔	v1.2	#6000

Unsupported, Planned

Attribute	Standard	Stored	Rendered	Notes
Fancy Underlines (kitty)	none	❌	❌	#7228

Unsupported, Unplanned

Attribute	Standard	Stored	Rendered	Notes
Extended Fonts (mintty)	none	❌	❌	#6779, unplanned

Miscellaneous Related Issues

• Support colons as a VT parameter separator #4321 pursuant to ITU T.416 (ISO-8613-6), we should support (prefer?) : for subparameter separators instead of ;
  • ("semicolon delimiters" are non-standard for SGR 38, 48; see terminfo here)

[jdebp]

Don't forget #6000. Also, kitty underline subparameters are listed in #2916. I have updated Attributes.ps1 as I said a while back.

[DHowett]

Thanks, got em.

[rbanffy]

SGR 53 (overlined) was introduced in ECMA-48 4th edition. And thanks for implementing it.

[Nosamdaman]

Are there plans to actually support bold typeface? I know there was some heavy discussion in #2916, but it doesn't seem like a consensus was reached. Personally I'd love to see proper support for bold typefaces as a heavy WSL and Solarized user.

[zadjii-msft]

Bold is actually being tracked by #109, whenever we get around to it ☺️