A little curiosity about pnum and tnum

mauro sacchetto
Posts: 353
Something escapes me on the mechanism adopted by some fonts to manage proportional and tabular numbers.
GaramondPremierePro does not seem to present proportional uppercase numbers. It contains the glyphs of the numbers (slots from 48 to 57) and those of the numbers .fitted (slots from 63033 to 63041 + 63196), but all the uppercase numbers have the same width (including the bearing, all are 486 pt), so in fact they are tabular as the .fitted ones.
However, if I compile with LaTeX I add the <lining> option, the numbers become proportional.
Did I look badly or is there some mechanism I didn't catch?
GaramondPremierePro does not seem to present proportional uppercase numbers. It contains the glyphs of the numbers (slots from 48 to 57) and those of the numbers .fitted (slots from 63033 to 63041 + 63196), but all the uppercase numbers have the same width (including the bearing, all are 486 pt), so in fact they are tabular as the .fitted ones.
However, if I compile with LaTeX I add the <lining> option, the numbers become proportional.
Did I look badly or is there some mechanism I didn't catch?
0
Comments
-
The two sets of glyphs are identical, but there are kerning pairs that affect the .fitted alternates (and none for the default figures).As a result, the .fitted figures that are substituted with {pnum} behave proportionally, even though technically they all have the same width.3
-
Ahhh ok! But what is the ratio of this choise? Other fonts have a different bearing for default (tabular) and .fitted figures. Isn't perhaps a more logical strategy?0
-
It will depend on the design of the numeral shapes and on the overall spacing. That said, since the proportional numeral 1 generally needs to be more tightly spaced to all other numerals than the tabular 1, it's more normal for the sidebearings to be adjusted than to rely on kerning.1
-
In practice, I generally duplicate my default figure glyphs for their <pnum> alternates.
Or, if the defaults are proportional, for their <tnum> alternates.
However, I often make the <tnum> glyphs for “one” wider, and the “zero” narrower, than their proportional siblings: non-identical twins.
3 -
I sometimes vary the width of a couple of other numerals, notably the 4, which can end up getting a bit pinched in tabular. Of course, the 4 is also one of the numerals that requires significant kerning in proportional, especially with 7.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 43 Introductions
- 3.7K Typeface Design
- 815 Font Technology
- 1.1K Technique and Theory
- 629 Type Business
- 449 Type Design Critiques
- 548 Type Design Software
- 30 Punchcutting
- 137 Lettering and Calligraphy
- 84 Technique and Theory
- 53 Lettering Critiques
- 495 Typography
- 307 History of Typography
- 115 Education
- 73 Resources
- 509 Announcements
- 82 Events
- 107 Job Postings
- 153 Type Releases
- 166 Miscellaneous News
- 271 About TypeDrawers
- 53 TypeDrawers Announcements
- 117 Suggestions and Bug Reports