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

markFeatureWriter: use GDEF to classify glyphs; make disjoint markClasses #276

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Sep 16, 2018

Conversation

anthrotype
Copy link
Member

This is towards fixing a bunch of related issues with defining what goes into the mark/mkmk feature

https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-fonts/issues/1223#issuecomment-398010907
notofonts/noto-source#122 (comment)
#261 (comment)

@anthrotype anthrotype force-pushed the gdef-mark-classes branch 2 times, most recently from 25c3f6e to b71e810 Compare September 16, 2018 16:26
@anthrotype anthrotype changed the title WIP: markFeatureWriter: use GDEF to classify glyphs; make disjoint markClasses markFeatureWriter: use GDEF to classify glyphs; make disjoint markClasses Sep 16, 2018
@anthrotype
Copy link
Member Author

anthrotype commented Sep 16, 2018

There are two changes in this PR:

  1. If a table GDEF { GlyphClassDef @Bases, @Ligature, @Marks, ; } GDEF; is present in the features.fea, then the MarkFeatureWriter will use those groups to define what is a base glyph, what is a ligature and what is a mark glyph. When no GDEF GlyphClassDef definition is present, the current behavior doesn't change. This addresses ligature for "allah" notofonts/noto-fonts#261.

  2. When a mark glyph contains multiple _-prefixed anchors, we only assign that glyph to one markClass; we no longer associate it with multiple markClasses one for each _-prefixed anchor that it may contain. Instead, we sort the glyph's anchor list by putting _bottom and _top anchors before all the rest, and then we only take the first anchor's name to define the glyph's markClass.
    This is, according to @schriftgestalt's coment in NotoSansMono-MM.glyphs fails to build... is this a source issue? notofonts/noto-source#122 (comment), what Glyphs.app does in these ambiguous cases when generating the mark feature. This is to fix a compilation error when the same mark glyph belongs to multiple mark classes that are used within the same mark lookup.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant