Closed vv-monsalve closed 5 months ago
I think I am fine with the new vertical metrics, but I don't have a strong opinion, so if you think they're fine, I'll go along with that.
Regarding the mark + mkmk features: I'm working on that in #109, will report back once I confirm the PR build works.
Could you check the fonts from this run? https://github.com/djrrb/Bungee/actions/runs/7547329837
If you agree these indeed fix the issues you mention above, I will make a new release.
I'll run new checks and report back
The mark positions look mostly good now, with a few exceptions.
However, there are issues with some stacked marks layering
The E dot + acute position may be fixable, but mark-to-base and mark-to-mark accents can't work in the Shade style.
I'm not sure what to do here. Perhaps we should remove the mark anchors for Shade so we don't get bad shapes.
Perhaps we should remove the mark anchors for Shade so we don't get bad shapes.
Hi Just, We reviewed this today, and considering the unique features of the Bungee Shade font, we have decided to proceed with this option for the update and wait for user feedback. If we receive any complaints or requests for additional language support, we will review it from there.
Hi Viviana, I have done this. Please check the latest run from this PR: https://github.com/djrrb/Bungee/actions/runs/8844751830
(I also added a fix a for an unrelated newer fontbakery check)
I've run new FB and Diffenator tests, and the fonts seem to be ready to go :)
There are only a few Warns that would be better for you to check before. They are reported in #110
Hi @justvanrossum. The following are the diff images for the v2.000 pre-release fonts.
Please inspect them to revise the following:
J
andj
+acutecomb
should work with dynamic composition for Dutch. This relates to our requirement for soft dotted glyphs.mark
andmkmk
cases that look not fully working (e.g.e̊
ü̃́
)Bungee