Diacritics revision Reg-Medium

vv-monsalve commented 3 years ago

@crystaltype Inspecting the files this is what I've found:

The comb ones appear lighter than the legacy. However, if you inspect them, they are actually using the legacy ones as components but in an 85%, which is clearly not ideal, as it could lead to fractional coordinates values.
Sometimes, as in ogonek, the component is at 100%, but the component is not actually used in the compound glyph
The comb marcs are actually used for the compound glyphs. So, perhaps the designer found the original shapes too heavy and that's why they were used in a percentage to solve the situation. But, as said, is not the ideal.

So, inspecting the current Medium Browser Images:

[x] The diacritics weight shouldn't be as heavy as the original legacy shapes
[x] The weight should be solved in the marks but not by reducing them in a percentage to prevent fractional coordinates.
[x] It would be best to take the marks of the Regular master to produce the medium weight ones. Doing so, we would also avoid them being shorted than the regular, as they are now.

In the image, the outline in the front is the Regular weight Screen Shot 2021-05-17 at 10 16 46

crystaltype commented 3 years ago

@vv-monsalve Thanks, I'm going to take the marks from the regular weight and make them bolder for medium weight as you suggested. I think we can merge both source files into 1 source file with 2 masters and 2 instances, is that OK?

vv-monsalve commented 3 years ago

I think we can merge both source files into 1 source file with 2 masters and 2 instances, is that OK?

If you consider it is going to optimise the process, sure. If you do so, you could also use the marks in both files and either interpolate them or tune them using RMX tools to find the better weight for the medium marks.

crystaltype commented 3 years ago

Thank you, I've made a pull request https://github.com/googlefonts/windsong/pull/7

googlefonts / windsong

Diacritics revision Reg-Medium #6