fontbakery
fontbakery copied to clipboard
fonttools
diacritic check summary
I try to reformulate what was said in the meeting yesterday for the diacritic check. I'll update this to-do with more details
- [ ] #3959
- [x] #3490
- [x] FAIL if missing combining mark (and mark feature) -> this is already done in gf-profile with the glyphset check since combining marks are in the defined GF glyphsets.
- [ ] #3328 and #3322
- [ ] #3296
- [ ] #3293
- [x] #3308
- [ ] #4210
ccmp related checks:
- [ ] #4068
- [x] #4059
it is OK to have a summary issue like this to track progress on a set of things. But it's important that the details are discussed in the individual issues for each of these new check proposals. Please post an issue for "WARN top-comb accents have _top and top anchors to allow multiple combining accents"
[ ] WARN Diacritics are used consistently (#3296)
I would propose a FAIL status for this one.
Added a new item to the above list.
@RosaWagner mentioned on chat "For the problem with GDEF table and confusion between legacy accents and comb accents, I can confirm that fixing Radio Canada is fixing this display issue on the API. It seems therefore more ans more important to implement [this issue]"
FYI, all the Tiro Indic families have a GDEF table warning;
⚠ WARN: Check mark characters are in GDEF mark glyph class. (com.google.fonts/check/gdef_mark_chars) ⚠ WARN The following mark characters could be in the GDEF mark glyph class: acutecomb (U+0301), brevebelowcomb (U+032E), brevecomb (U+0306), candrabinducomb (U+0310), caroncomb (U+030C), cedillacomb (U+0327), circumflexcomb (U+0302), commaaccentcomb (U+0326), dieresisbelowcomb (U+0324), dieresiscomb (U+0308) and 9 more.
This is the consequences of such issue in GF:
@davelab6 I don't know if the warn should be a fail, or if GF should stop displaying glyphs that are actually not encoded in the font.
cc @vv-monsalve @m4rc1e
This seems important enough to increase priority, so I moved it now to the immediately next planned release.
Adding this issue to bump up priority on this list of checks, this is the example of a font that shouldn't have passed QA: https://github.com/google/fonts/issues/6226