It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Mikhail Vasilev said:...And on Windows particularly Times New Roman reads especially good, that is due to some "secret sauce" I beleive that makes it behave well in Windows apps. ...
Johannes Neumeier said:
One thing I would really, really love to see some traction on is a production viable, multi-platform, open source font editor. As far as I am aware there are some projects in various degrees of staleness, so I doubt there is something concrete that can "just get funded". Maybe the creation of a publicly announced incentive could get this (gigantulan) ball moving? Or a series of hackatons on whatever seems the most likely contender? GF, if anybody, has the profile to make a dent here.You can always dream...
Florian Pircher said:
@Mikhail Vasilev you might also be interested in the Libertinus fonts. They don’t have a center-line cut (as far as I can tell) but there is a monospaced version which might fulfill the same role.
John Hudson said:
@Mikhail Vasilev Like this?It works slightly better in Cyrillic, due to fewer ascenders in the lowecase, but still looks really weird. I can imagine doing this for some titling lettering on occasion, but not as something common in fonts.
Mikhail Vasilev said:Yes like this. Looks unusual of course due to strong habit. But after some time it is ok.After all it was initially designed and optimized for baseline placement. Ideally, caps and digits should be redesigned to be more natural part of mixed case flow. Also latin has sort of optical emphasis on the baseline due to lots of serifs on the baseline area (e.g. "mnhlk" glyphs). I think this effect can be reduced somehow but I am not sure how though.
Johannes Neumeier said:
You can always dream...
John Savard said:
Dave Crossland said:DAMN THEY MOVE QUICK BRO
This tactic may prove counterproductive. If Monotype becomes for type what Hasbro is for boardgames, politicians may decide that giving strong legal protection to type designs is against the public interest
Dave Crossland said:DAMN THEY MOVE QUICK BRO
It works slightly better in Cyrillic, due to fewer ascenders in the lowecase, but still looks really weird. I can imagine doing this for some titling lettering on occasion, but not as something common in fonts.
I realize I am writing the exact same thing as yours, if you don't know what "hinting instructions", "VTT", "font scaler" are...
Apparently the author of the first truetype font editor, Apple's RoyalT in the 198x, works/worked for Google now, or at one time, in the android area. I think it was cross-platform, as some of it eventually became Microsoft's VTT.
Mike Reed's 2-person Skia company was famously acquired by Google in 2005 (https://www.crunchbase.com/acquisition/google-acquires-skia--ad6cccc9) and was the backbone of Android's rendering (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skia_Graphics_Engine). Skia is used in fontmake compilation for the removeOverlap() step, which has room to improve.
Mike recently left Google.
Perhaps cross-platform is not the right description - code written 30 years ago made fewer assumptions about what is the host, and what libraries are or are not available, and more portable in that sense. On the other hand, things were not modular. Dynamic libraries / dlls weren't a thing; linux kernel modules (the ability to load/unload drivers on plug and play) wasn't there(? used much) until this side of the millennium. It was portable but not cross-platform.
Perhaps other styles can emulate Noto’s scope?
On a personal note, I know it’s not very popular, but I might be persuaded to add bold and italics to Bellefair. Dm me with a proposal, if you like.
After a business sans and serif (or low/high stroke contrast modulation) style, what is the 3rd most important style for any/every script? the 5th? 10th? I don't have a good answer today. Probably I think the 3rd style for Noto should be the "how to write" sort of handwriting style, since at the highest level Noto is about literacy, and a font to read a language in a UI (sans) or document (serif) is important for literacy, but then a font to 'write" a language is next. Maybe a sans mono is 4th, and there's already a Noto Sans Mono for Latin Greek Cyrillic. But then, are wedding fonts more important than scary fonts? etc
I'll add Bellefair to my list
Perhaps there is some way that a script typeface might educate such readers, say, by being available in both a disconnected and a connected version. Possibly with some kind of programmed interaction between the two?
I don’t know about the Cyrillic, but the Latin connected doesn’t match the plain version very well, it’s too bouncy, not neat enough.
There is certainly design space for a Latin script face in which the two versions more closely match.
At any rate, both versions should be developed in tandem—as with the ideal scenario for developing Latin-Cyrillic-Greek types—rather than finalizing one and accommodating the others to that.
Firstly, I think that clever and hard-working people at commercial software X that actually makes some features their customers are happily to pay for, is a reasonable agreement and transaction on both sides.
If you want a feature in Inkscape and Scribus, are you willing to pay the Inkscape and Scribus people for their work yourself, however small your donation/ sponsorship might be? I believe both projects accept donations.
As my comments above regarding font editors and Glyphapp , how about proposing that Google pays Symacrodobe "well enough" to open-source their work and make it free? That way software enthusiasts can improve on it in directions not driven by pure commercial needs, and Inkscape /Scribus people can learn from it , and the people at Symacrodobe get compensated for their hard work properly.
The OpenType specification is now over twenty years old. I personally attended the first OpenType Jamboree hosted by Microsoft sometime back during the Clinton Administration. The page layout components of the TeX typesetting system are older still, as is the HZ typesetting algorithm adopted by Adobe in InDesign. Good-looking H&J is the heart of all good typesetting.
Adobe today is not the company it was in 1998. In some respects (Source Sans and Source Serif) they, like Microsoft with its WSL and embrace of non-Windows environments, have progressed. I have been in computers long enough to observe software innovations begin with private funding and then later, after their creators have been rightly recognized and bought out, been dispersed into open source tools and libraries around which newer, even more sophisticated proprietary tools can grow. Sampo Kaasila’s Visual TypeMan was quoted to me at $15K at one time before Microsoft eventually bought it and adapted it into Visual TrueType, which they now distribute free of charge. Inkscape does probably 80% of what Illustrator can do, sometimes more tediously and obscurely, likewise the GIMP versus Photoshop, and Scribus and XeTeX versus InDesign. Adobe’s AFDKO is given away free as well.
In my opinion, many glyphs and features in modern commercial, free and open source fonts are inaccessible to ordinary folks without a Creative Cloud subscription or the time to gain workable competence in XeTeX or Scribus. To this day, Microsoft Word does not render the true small caps in an OpenType SMCP feature, not even through the feature selector in the Advanced tab. I can get froofy ct and st ligatures in Word, but the small caps are still spindly and artificially rendered. I seem to recall LibreOffice handles this one aspect much better than Word.
The point of my comment was that Google can likely more efficiently finance the further development of existing open source illustration and layout projects, to more benefit for Google Fonts type users, than other alternatives. In fact I seem to recall Inkscape had some major recent advances thanks to a Google Summer of Code event. Being the giant company they are, just like Microsoft and Adobe, I’ve had my grumbles with Google’s left hand while praising their right hand.
Paying Adobe or Microsoft to open-source some of their software is simply not practical from their lawyers’ standpoints, having to chase down original parties (or their heirs!) from ancient contracts and code licenses that probably no current Adobe or Microsoft employee even has working knowledge of. Not even unlimited money could untangle such a knot.
That said, my proposal (sent private to Dave) indeed involves going towards partially untangling the historical Adobe + Microsoft + Apple cross-licensing agreement mess, and allow them to open-source some more of their age-old tools further, including Typeman / Visual TrueType, further.