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

Kerning issues with Ponomar Unicode #34

Closed
Mwvceu opened this issue Jan 2, 2018 · 16 comments
Closed

Kerning issues with Ponomar Unicode #34

Mwvceu opened this issue Jan 2, 2018 · 16 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@Mwvceu
Copy link

Mwvceu commented Jan 2, 2018

5fonts3words
screenshot from LibreOffice

@typiconman typiconman changed the title Kerning 3 pairs (o-z o-d ~y) Kerning issues with Ponomar Unicode Jan 3, 2018
@typiconman typiconman self-assigned this Jan 3, 2018
@KrasnayaPloshchad
Copy link

KrasnayaPloshchad commented Feb 26, 2018

SIL claimed they used “Graphite’s smart shape-based kerning mechanism” to avoid collisions in their Awami Nastaliq font.
https://software.sil.org/awami/what-is-special/
It’s exciting to know how does it works, and since Ponomar used Graphite too, I think you can improve the kerning in this way.

@typiconman
Copy link
Owner

Graphite kerning is hard to do. But yes, it should be done. See also #1.

@typiconman typiconman added this to the v2.1 milestone Mar 17, 2019
typiconman added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 20, 2019
@typiconman
Copy link
Owner

I updated the kerning, but the glagol + titlo + uk case is very difficult. Adding more kerning makes it look too spaced. Perhaps a better solution is to contextually substitute to a left-truncated uk in this case (see the last example). @Mwvceu @starover77 please comment.

Screenshot from 2019-03-20 17-41-05

@starover77
Copy link
Collaborator

The contextual substitution with left-truncated uk looks good to me, and I think it would be an improvement to add it to the lookups. In all of the other demonstrated fonts, only the Pochaevsk and Irmologion fonts look OK with this character combination, which demonstrates that not all fonts are equal.

@typiconman
Copy link
Owner

Take a look at this.
Screenshot from 2019-03-20 21-38-36

@typiconman typiconman mentioned this issue Mar 21, 2019
@typiconman
Copy link
Owner

The reported by @Mwvceu have been fixed. @starover77 Please check the kerning with the latest version of the font and see if there are any other issues.

@starover77
Copy link
Collaborator

Looks good to me.

@typiconman typiconman reopened this Apr 8, 2019
@typiconman
Copy link
Owner

typiconman commented Apr 8, 2019

I think we rushed with closing this. Placing an accent above the Uk creates problems. @starover77 please comment, especially regarding number 2.
Screenshot from 2019-04-08 19-13-03

@starover77
Copy link
Collaborator

I am not seeing any problems. What should I be looking for?

@typiconman
Copy link
Owner

Is the position of the acute accent correct? It looks strange, it almost collides with the ascender on the Uk. Here are some more examples:
Screenshot from 2019-04-08 20-30-45

@starover77
Copy link
Collaborator

It does look a little bit close, but not so bad that I think it looks wrong. In my opinion, I don't think it's worth any further attention.

However, the fourth letter, with the kamora, looks wrong to me. (I suppose this is because I am used to seeing pre-Nikonian poluustav texts.) Contextually, I am used to seeing a kamora placed over a completely truncated Uk (both left and right ascenders shortened), but I suppose that Muscovite Synodal era typography doesn't typically use this contextual substitution.

@typiconman
Copy link
Owner

The Uk with the kamora is correct for Muscovite Synodal typography.

@starover77
Copy link
Collaborator

Yeah, I figured that. Modern typeface matrices had a lot less diversity that earlier forms, where truncated letters were used more extensively.

@typiconman
Copy link
Owner

So, should I keep the acute accent where it is now? Or return it to the raised position, as with the non-truncated version?

@starover77
Copy link
Collaborator

My vote: Leave it where it is now (lowered).

@typiconman
Copy link
Owner

Alright. Then we'll consider this closed.

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

4 participants