Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Thomas Phinney

About

Username
Thomas Phinney
Joined
Visits
882
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
526
Invited by
Admin James Puckett
Posts
704
  • Re: Naming font modifications

    @Simon Cozens I think the problem with your proposal is that everyone would be independently renaming their old and/or new version of the same fonts, so the multiplicity of names would be large. With this independent renaming, you will certainly end up with cases of both (1) same font but different names and (2) different fonts but same name.

    So, I don’t like that part of your proposal. I do like the idea of a font installer that is smart enough to advise which is likely the better/newer version of a font, including version string info among its algorithms and info, but not relying solely on that.
  • Re: Public domain pros and cons

    Or, offer the font under the user's choice of several highly permissive licenses.
  • Re: The Pilcrow

    I vote “yes” and make an italic pilcrow. In general, my default is to make all letters slanted in an italic font. I have a specific list of glyphs to keep upright in an italic, originally based on Adobe’s practice in this area.

    Note that if a glyph is maintained as upright in an italic font, it may still need sidebearings or spacing adjustment, especially if it has an unusual vertical position (asterisk, trademark, copyright, and degree, for example).

    My list for a large font I am working on:

    asterisk
    plus
    less
    equal
    greater
    asciicircum
    bar
    asciitilde
    trademark
    copyright
    logicalnot
    registered
    degree
    plusminus
    .notdef
    revlogicalnot
    uni2120
    uni2117
    estimated
    uni2190
    uni2192
    arrowup
    arrowdown
    lessequal
    greaterequal
    approxequal
    notequal
    uni2213
    infinity
    lozenge
    integral
    radical
    uni25A0
    uni25B2
    uni25B3
    uni25B6
    uni25B7
    uni25BC
    uni25BD
    uni25C0
    uni25C1
    uni25C9
    uni25C6
    uni2610
    uni2611
    uni2713
    uni2752

  • Re: Units per em

    It originally had a larger UPM, I think 1000, and set much smaller, in OS X 10.0.

    It has been sized relative to the caps, including swashy ones, and thus had a tiny x-height compared to other fonts at a given point size. I guess this confused some people, or at least seemed counter-intuitive.

    So Apple decided to resize the font (by making it 2.5x as large). I think the change was in OS X 10.2, IIRC. The easiest way to do this was to leave everything else the same, not touch anything else in the font or a single glyph, but to change the UPM value. A very simple adjustment from a technical standpoint—even an elegant way to make the change.
  • Re: the OpenType features UI questionnaire /Q1


    I would be very happy to also design vari-font reference UI. I do not see so much overlap/synergy with the discretionary OpenType features so it makes the design project simply longer. not twice as long, because vari-fonts is not as complex as OT features.
    I agree that there isn't actually that much synergy in the work to be done with Variable Fonts. But VF is something that has attention and mind share and might easily get funded. Dealing with both under a single umbrella would be a strategic move to try to get the general feature UI funded and paid attention to. (Probably not something I should say publicly, oh well.)

    Perhaps the Variable Fonts work will not be as complex from a “design the user interface” perspective. From either an infrastructure or app-implementation perspective, I suspect it will be more work, not less.

     T