search

googlefonts / geologica

SIL Open Font License 1.1
47 stars 2 forks source link

New WARNS on static fonts #8

Closed vv-monsalve closed 1 year ago

vv-monsalve commented 3 years ago

New FB checks under the latest 0.7.33 version were performed on static fonts and new WARNs was reported.

Below is a sample of the Warns reported in one of the fonts. To check the full reports see Geologica, and Geologica Sarp.

This Warns are related to our OutlinesQuality Checklist. Please inspect it and ensure it is covered for Geologica.


⚠ WARN: Are there any misaligned on-curve points? * [com.google.fonts/check/outline_alignment_miss](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_alignment_miss) 
--- Rationale ---

This test heuristically looks for on-curve points which are close to, but do
not sit on, significant boundary coordinates. For example, a point which has a
Y-coordinate of 1 or -1 might be a misplaced baseline point. As well as the
baseline, the test also checks for points near the x-height (but only for lower
case Latin letters), cap-height, ascender and descender Y coordinates.

Not all such misaligned curve points are a mistake, and sometimes the design
may call for points in locations near the boundaries. As this test is liable to
generate significant numbers of false positives, the test will pass if there
are more than 100 reported misalignments.
* ⚠ **WARN** The following glyphs have on-curve points which have potentially incorrect y coordinates: * uni0202: X=747.0,Y=1872.0 (should be at ascender 1874?) * Aring: X=826.0,Y=1872.0 (should be at ascender 1874?) * Aring: X=668.5,Y=1872.0 (should be at ascender 1874?) * Aringacute: X=826.0,Y=1872.0 (should be at ascender 1874?) * Aringacute: X=668.5,Y=1872.0 (should be at ascender 1874?) * uni0206: X=667.0,Y=1872.0 (should be at ascender 1874?) * uni0122: X=756.0,Y=-622.5 (should be at descender -624?) * uni0122: X=985.5,Y=-623.0 (should be at descender -624?) * uni0136: X=698.0,Y=-622.5 (should be at descender -624?) * uni0136: X=927.5,Y=-623.0 (should be at descender -624?) and 54 more. [code: found-misalignments]
⚠ WARN: Are any segments inordinately short? * [com.google.fonts/check/outline_short_segments](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_short_segments) 
--- Rationale ---

This test looks for outline segments which seem particularly short (less than
0.006%% of the overall path length).

This test is not run for variable fonts, as they may legitimately have short
segments. As this test is liable to generate significant numbers of false
positives, the test will pass if there are more than 100 reported short
segments.
* ⚠ **WARN** The following glyphs have segments which seem very short: * eogonek contains a short segment B<<1093.0,98.0>-<1080.0,88.0>-<1064.0,79.0>> * eogonek contains a short segment B<<658.0,-29.0>-<643.0,-30.0>-<629.0,-30.0>> * uni0416 contains a short segment L<<838.0,892.0>--<861.0,892.0>> * uni0416 contains a short segment L<<1265.0,892.0>--<1289.0,892.0>> * uni0416 contains a short segment L<<1285.0,560.0>--<1265.0,560.0>> * uni0416 contains a short segment L<<861.0,560.0>--<840.0,560.0>> * uni041A contains a short segment L<<557.0,906.0>--<597.0,906.0>> * uni041A contains a short segment L<<592.0,538.0>--<557.0,538.0>> * uni040C contains a short segment L<<557.0,906.0>--<597.0,906.0>> * uni040C contains a short segment L<<592.0,538.0>--<557.0,538.0>> and 67 more. [code: found-short-segments]
⚠ WARN: Do outlines contain any jaggy segments? * [com.google.fonts/check/outline_jaggy_segments](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_jaggy_segments) 
--- Rationale ---

This test heuristically detects outline segments which form a particularly
small angle, indicative of an outline error. This may cause false positives in
cases such as extreme ink traps, so should be regarded as advisory and backed
up by manual inspection.
* ⚠ **WARN** The following glyphs have jaggy segments: * uni20A9: L<<431.0,560.0>--<432.0,546.0>>/L<<432.0,546.0>--<433.0,560.0>> = 8.171233559949766 * uni20A9: L<<651.0,810.0>--<644.0,876.0>>/L<<644.0,876.0>--<637.0,810.0>> = 12.108383788229629 and uni20A9: L<<871.0,560.0>--<872.0,546.0>>/L<<872.0,546.0>--<873.0,560.0>> = 8.171233559949766 [code: found-jaggy-segments]
⚠ WARN: Do outlines contain any semi-vertical or semi-horizontal lines? * [com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical) 
--- Rationale ---

This test detects line segments which are nearly, but not quite, exactly
horizontal or vertical. Sometimes such lines are created by design, but often
they are indicative of a design error.

This test is disabled for italic styles, which often contain nearly-upright
lines.
* ⚠ **WARN** The following glyphs have semi-vertical/semi-horizontal lines: * arrowdown: L<<1046.0,1520.0>--<1048.0,382.0>> * arrowdown: L<<752.0,382.0>--<750.0,1520.0>> * arrowleft: L<<1720.0,586.0>--<582.0,584.0>> * arrowleft: L<<582.0,880.0>--<1720.0,882.0>> * arrowright: L<<1218.0,584.0>--<80.0,586.0>> * arrowright: L<<80.0,882.0>--<1218.0,880.0>> * arrowup: L<<1048.0,1018.0>--<1046.0,-120.0>> * arrowup: L<<750.0,-120.0>--<752.0,1018.0>> * five.tnum: L<<286.0,1400.0>--<1116.0,1396.0>> * five: L<<224.0,1400.0>--<1054.0,1396.0>> and 7 more. [code: found-semi-vertical]