Do all characters in all gf glyphsets latin lists exist in latin + latin-ext? #133
Comments
|
I guess there is even an opportunity to update the CI on this repo to ensure that all characters in all glyph sets in this repo exist in the encodings files in this repo. |
|
The fast immediate answer is no, there is a mismatch indeed. As discussed in the above linked issue many of the combining marks included in the Glyphsets are not part of the current |
|
I thought the subsetter problems occur when characters are in latin-ext, and this is a different (worse) issue? :) |
|
The nam files which exist in this repo are from many years ago (Roozbeh era). We do have the ability to make new nam files based on the glyphsets work but they won't be called latin or latin-ext, without rejigging the existing code. A glyphset and nam file are treated as two different docs by this repo. |
|
Anyways, here's the encoded glyphs which are in the Latin and Latin-ext nam files but not in any Latin glyphset (407 missing encoded glyphs)
Script can be found here, https://gist.github.com/m4rc1e/21ad976f777c6ddb06dc89174d3fdbd6 |
|
There are 130 characters in the GF Latin glyphsets that are not in the latin, latin-ext and vietnamese subsets. It’s mostly symbols but there’s a dozen that should be in GF_Latin_Beyond or GF_Latin_African. The latin-ext includes characters in Latin Extended-D that haven’t been assigned yet in Unicode, since some of those have been assigned since the files were last modified or will be in the near future, it’s future proof. |
|
Thanks Marc, but it's the opposite map I need :) I want to ensure that if I'm commissioning typeface designers to fill out any of our glyphsets, the characters in their fonts will be served.
I'm under the impression that they haven't changed very much at all, or even really at all, since then.
Sure, that's understood. Incremental transfer will make Unicode Range based slicing from the nam files obsolete, and I doubt the name files will change, just be made obsolete. |
Apologies. Here are the encoded characters defined in the glyphsets which are not in the nam files (212 in total).
|
|
Thanks! Can you add a col for which glyphset definition the character is currently in please :) Ideally we would also have a col with a list of languages that we know the character is used in; is that easy to add? And on the GF team side, I expect we no wneed to add the linguistic ones to latin-ext and the symbols ones to a symbols set (assuming there was one made for Noto Symbols when that was onboarded.) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Possibly related to googlefonts/nam-files#6 but while chatting with @chrissimpkins I wondered, do all characters in all gf glyphsets latin lists exist in latin + latin-ext (in https://github.com/googlefonts/glyphsets/tree/main/Lib/glyphsets/encodings)?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: