Sarah Groß

@rafallyczkowskiadylic the feature order is quite a critical thing to add before we start working on implementing more features like `calt` etc. It would be great if we could merge...

Sure, that's fine! We don't have to support everything at once when implementing a new feature or format. We should just make sure that users are notified about any missing/unsupported...

I'm totally for unifying duplicate functionality. The way that feature processing is currently structured is something that has deterred me from working on new font features because it frankly seems...

Great, looking forward to it! Thanks for your work!

Fixes #501 according to https://github.com/opentypejs/opentype.js/issues/501#issuecomment-1543727128 @rafallyczkowskiadylic it's been a couple of weeks - just a friendly nudge. :)

I was finally able to test this more thoroughly... I merged it into my experimental fork after resolving some conflicts. The chars in the GPOS–3 test of the unicode test...

Ok, now the tests for disabling the mark feature are failing of course, because I implemented it so that default features cannot be disabled. We'll have to talk about how...

The more I look at this, the more confused I get... 😅 I think we still need some cleaning up before we can finally merge this, but I'm lost here...

By the way, trying to get rid of the latn-specific `applyLatinLigatures`, I replaced it with ``` function applyLatinFeatures() { checkGlyphIndexStatus.call(this); applySubstitutions.call(this, 'latn', ['liga', 'rlig', 'ccmp', 'calt']); } ``` in analogy...

Thanks for your work! You can check out the unicode test suite: https://github.com/unicode-org/text-rendering-tests It does exactly what you proposed, compare SVG output with expected results. You can replace the opentype.js...