Open j77h opened 1 year ago
Roboto has billions of users, making out difficult to inform everyone individually and has been updated to variables fonts in two publicized stages; Roboto Classic wraps the original in a variable font and Roboto flex goes farther, adding wider and bolder styles an optical size axis and more.
Since 2017, Google has been publishing information about this, the latest is here, https://material.io/blog/roboto-flex
Each is a public repo with a README file and should be informative enough to follow the changes.
If you are having trouble with the thin space, perhaps you should try a newer version.
Thanks.
On Mar 9, 2023, at 1:10 AM, jon @.***> wrote:
References: googlefonts/roboto#24 googlefonts/roboto#101 notofonts/latin-greek-cyrillic#182
This was resolved for Noto LGC by making both u2009 and u202F one-sixth of an EM.
Subtitles on YouTube still use Roboto v2, and the width of the NNBSP is too wide in some browsers. (NNBSP is used in French typography.)
Somehow, in Chrome on Linux and Edge on Windows, the widths of all narrow spaces look good. Don't know what Chrome does behind the scenes -- the results do not match any form of Roboto, yet Inspector says Roboto is the font used. The WOFF2 file it sends does not have any thin spaces in it at all.
In Firefox (on Linux, with Roboto 2.138 installed) the NNBSP appears far too wide, as is consistent with the width of u202F in v 2.138, where it has the same width as u205F. (u205F, MMSP, is meant to be 'medium', which it is in Roboto 2.138.)
Note that Roboto 2.138 is from github, and fonts.google.com provides only 2.137, which has no u202F.
In RobotoFlex v3.100 the width of 2009 thin space is only 100 (less than the hair space), which might cause problems in future.
I'm not sure if this is the right place to make this request, but github.com/googlefonts/roboto/ seems to be unattended.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Thanks David.
In RobotoFlex v3.100, the width of u2009 is unusually thin, and there are no other narrow spaces at all.
Is there a reason why spaces in Roboto Flex cannot be reasonably consistent with Noto Sans LGC?
As long as Roboto v2 is used for YouTube captions, can it be updated to have narrower width for u202F?
And can such new version of v2 be actually published? (fonts.google.com still has only v 2.137)
Following is a list of all space codepoints and their widths as reported by Python fontTools, in current versions of Roboto v2, RobotoFlex v3, and NotoSans-Regular LGC. (Roboto versions are the latest releases I could find on github.)
The column headed 'Em' is the fraction of units per Em, for direct comparison of Noto and Roboto.
Where a code-point is not listed, it's not present in the font.
Roboto-Regular_2.138_2017-08-03.ttf
2048 units per Em
ucode units Em
u0020 507 0.2476
u00A0 507 0.2476
u2000 1044 0.5098
u2001 2089 1.0200
u2002 1044 0.5098
u2003 2089 1.0200
u2004 697 0.3403
u2005 522 0.2549
u2006 348 0.1699
u2007 1151 0.5620
u2008 560 0.2734
u2009 418 0.2041
u200A 209 0.1021
u202F 507 0.2476 * TOO WIDE
u205F 507 0.2476
RobotoFlex-Variable_3.100.ttf
2048 units per Em
ucode units Em
u0020 500 0.2441
u00A0 500 0.2441
u2002 1138 0.5557
u2009 100 0.0488 * TOO NARROW
NotoSans-Regular.ttf
1000 units per Em
ucode units Em
u0020 260 0.2600
u00A0 260 0.2600
u2000 500 0.5000
u2001 1000 1.0000
u2002 500 0.5000
u2003 1000 1.0000
u2004 333 0.3330
u2005 250 0.2500
u2006 167 0.1670
u2007 572 0.5720
u2008 268 0.2680
u2009 200 0.2000
u200A 100 0.1000
u202F 200 0.2000
u205F 372 0.3720
References: https://github.com/googlefonts/roboto/issues/24 https://github.com/googlefonts/roboto/issues/101 https://github.com/notofonts/latin-greek-cyrillic/issues/182
This was resolved for Noto LGC by making both u2009 and u202F one-sixth of an EM.
Subtitles on YouTube still use Roboto v2, and the width of the NNBSP is too wide in some browsers. (NNBSP is used in French typography.)
Somehow, in Chrome on Linux and Edge on Windows, the widths of all narrow spaces look good. Don't know what Chrome does behind the scenes -- the results do not match any form of Roboto, yet Inspector says Roboto is the font used. The WOFF2 file it sends does not have any thin spaces in it at all.
In Firefox (on Linux, with Roboto 2.138 installed) the NNBSP appears far too wide, as is consistent with the width of u202F in v 2.138, where it has the same width as u205F. (u205F, MMSP, is meant to be 'medium', which it is in Roboto 2.138.)
Note that Roboto 2.138 is from github, and fonts.google.com provides only 2.137, which has no u202F.
In RobotoFlex v3.100 the width of 2009 thin space is only 100 (less than the hair space), which might cause problems in future.
I'm not sure if this is the right place to make this request, but github.com/googlefonts/roboto/ seems to be unattended.