Missing Latin Subscript small letter in libertinus serif but present in libertine G

[Pierre3888]

Hi, this completes the information from issue #407. Some Latin subscript small letters are present in Linux Libertine G but not in Libertinus Serif (AFAIK). Below is the comparison between these two fonts. Letters b, c, d, f, g, j, q, w, y, z are missing. Curiously some letters are on two places in Linux Libertine G (h, k, l, m, n, p, r, s, t). It would be fine to have all of the subscript letters.

letter	Libertine G	Libertinus
a	2090	2090
b	E149
c	E14A
d	E14B
e	2091	2091
f	E14D
g	E14E
h	2095	2095
i	E150	1D62
j	E151
k	E14F 2096	2096
l	E152 2097	2097
m	E154 2096	2098
n	E155 2099	2099
o	2092	2092
p	E157 209A	209A
q	E158
r	E159	1D63
s	E15A 209B	209B
t	E15B 209C	209C
u	E15C	1D64
v	E15D	1D65
w	E15E
x	2093	2093
y	E160
z	E161

[waldyrious]

Hey @Pierre3888 — I took the liberty to reformat your comment to help with readability (especially the table, which is now rendered into a proper HTML table). I hope you don't mind :)

[Pierre3888]

Of course I don't mind. Thanks for the job

[Pierre3888]

I have been able to copy/paste 10 of the missing glyphs from Linux Libertine Regular 5.1.3 and Italic to Libertinus 0.40 Can someone help me to put it here ?

[khaledhosny]

The PUA glyphs were dropped intentionally since I’m totally against font-specific text encoding (and these sort of issues are exactly why; people use font-specific text encoding and assume switching to a different font will preserve this while it is not at all guaranteed).

Super and subscripts in Unicode are standalone characters with notational uses and not typographic styles, which is why gaps in the coverage are not filled by Unicode unless there is evidence for use in such notation systems.

[khaledhosny]

But it should be fine to bring back missing ones that have Unicode code points and map them to these code points and not to PUA code points.

[Crissov]

I think the table is only omitting ⱼ U+2C7C then.