-
Re: Combining marks advance width
That's really not a good idea. The i and j characters do not have any Unicode decompositions, so will simply appear to layout engines as missing, causing either .notdef display or fallback to an…4 -
Re: Combining marks advance width
For anyone looking at this beyond European scripts: Sometimes it is necessary to class a glyph as a mark in GDEF in order to be able to filter it out of a GSUB or GPOS operation, and this can mean cl…5 -
Re: Zero width joiner can be omitted from GSUB?
Quite a few years ago, Unicode specified that the ZWJ character could be used to specify a kind of intent-to-ligate in Latin and other non-complex scripts. The trouble was, of course, that inserting …4 -
Re: Notdef: generic or style-specific?
@"Chris Lozos" I think perhaps we're thinking about the .notdef glyph in different ways: I think of it as a signal to the document creator that the font he or she is using doesn't…3 -
Re: Bank Gothic Variable Font / FontLab VI
Not crazy about Science Gothic. Gothic Science on the other hand...5
