Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

digit one with long upstroke #783

Closed
pv4 opened this issue Dec 25, 2020 · 0 comments
Closed

digit one with long upstroke #783

pv4 opened this issue Dec 25, 2020 · 0 comments

Comments

@pv4
Copy link

pv4 commented Dec 25, 2020

The current 1 (one) is very similar to l (lowercase l) especially in slab variant and for small font size. It would be great to have a variant with longer "upstroke" (not sure it's a proper name for the element of a glyph).

one-long_upstroke

Currently (to get the result on the image above) I apply the following patch when building

diff -Napur Iosevka.orig/font-src/glyphs/number/index.ptl Iosevka/font-src/glyphs/number/index.ptl
--- Iosevka.orig/font-src/glyphs/number/index.ptl       2020-11-16 03:45:53.773586338 +0300
+++ Iosevka/font-src/glyphs/number/index.ptl    2020-12-20 20:20:07.551388652 +0300
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ glyph-block Digits-One : begin
                include : VBar (Middle + balance) 0 top
                include : dispiro
                        flat (Middle - HalfStroke * HVContrast + balance) top [widths topSW 0]
-                       curl (Middle - Stroke / 8 * HVContrast - HookX * 1.25 + balance) (top - Stroke / 8 - Hook * 0.75 * (top / CAP))
+                       curl (Middle - Stroke / 8 * HVContrast - HookX * 1.25 + balance) (top - Stroke / 8 - Hook * 2.0 * (top / CAP))
 
        create-glyph 'one.lnum.nobase' : glyph-proc
                include : MarkSet.capital

The coefficient 2.0 (instead of 0.75) was empirically choosen among variants with step of 0.25. 2.25 makes the upstroke look too long and the digit itself unnatural, 1.50 makes the upstroke not long enough to distinguish from the current variant. 2.0 appears slightly better visually then 1.75.

Could you please add the variant described (both base and nobase)?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants