search

notofonts / noto-fonts

Noto fonts, except for CJK and emoji
http://fonts.google.com/noto
SIL Open Font License 1.1
2.46k stars 199 forks source link

Design inconsistencies in Noto Sans Javanese #1426

Closed bennylin closed 5 years ago

bennylin commented 5 years ago

Defect Report

Title

The design of several glyphs need some adjustment for readability (legibility) and consistency between Regular and Bold, especially glyphs U+A993, A9AD, A9D7, A9BA, A9BB

Font

'NotoSansJavanese-Regular.ttf' and 'NotoSansJavanese-Bold.ttf'

Where the font came from, and when

Site: https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-fonts/tree/master/phaseIII_only/unhinted/ttf/NotoSansJavanese Date: 2019-01-15 (preferred format)

Font Version

  • Win -- It's version 1.01 for regular, and 2.000 for Bold

OS name and version

Win 10 ver 1703

Application name and version

Tested in Firefox 61, Edge 40, and IE 11

Issue

image

U+A993 (Ga Murda): The shape of the Bold one is correct, while the Regular shape's left side should form an "m" like shape. That shape too much resemble A992 or A9AB, which would affect readability. The pasangan in Bold is correct, while the pasangan in Regular is wrong.

U+A9AD (La): Similar as above. The shape of the Bold one is correct, while the Regular shape's left side should form an "m" like shape. That shape too much resemble A992 or A9AB, which would affect readibility. The pasangan in Bold is correct, while the shape of the pasangan in Regular also has the defect as the base.

U+A9D7 (numeral 7): It has the same shape as U+A993 (La), minus the pasangan.

U+A9BA and U+A9BB: same comments as above. The left part of the glyphs should looks more like the letter "m".

Character data

U+A993, U+A9AD, U+A9AD, U+A9D7, U+A9BA and U+A9BB

Screenshot

Screenshot already included in the Issue. Taken in Microsoft Word Office 365

punchcutter commented 5 years ago

You are comparing the very old version 1.01 Regular with the new version 2.0 Bold. Version 2 is a complete redesign so version 1.01 Regular is irrelevant. You need to compare the new Regular and Bold.

bennylin commented 5 years ago

Please add tag Script-Javanese

bennylin commented 5 years ago

You are comparing the very old version 1.01 Regular with the new version 2.0 Bold. Version 2 is a complete redesign so version 1.01 Regular is irrelevant. You need to compare the new Regular and Bold.

I'm downloading it (again) from the latest version here (dated 29 days ago) https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-fonts/blob/master/phaseIII_only/unhinted/ttf/NotoSansJavanese/NotoSansJavanese-Regular.ttf

If you're saying they're not the latest one, please do tell me where I can find the latest one.

I'm suspecting it's version 2, but they failed to update the number.

image

Believe me, i know what version 1 looked like. It was much horrible than this. Pain in the eye. This one is much better and the designer listened to the users' concerns.

punchcutter commented 5 years ago

Those should be the latest or https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-fonts/blob/master/unhinted/NotoSansJavanese-Regular.ttf and https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-fonts/blob/master/unhinted/NotoSansJavanese-Bold.ttf You probably need to delete the old one on Windows first. I suspect when you install it's adding a new file to your C:\Windows\Fonts folder, but not using it. When I have that issue I use cmd as administrator and delete all the old files completely before installing.

bennylin commented 5 years ago

Those should be the latest or https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-fonts/blob/master/unhinted/NotoSansJavanese-Regular.ttf and https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-fonts/blob/master/unhinted/NotoSansJavanese-Bold.ttf You probably need to delete the old one on Windows first. I suspect when you install it's adding a new file to your C:\Windows\Fonts folder, but not using it. When I have that issue I use cmd as administrator and delete all the old files completely before installing.

That seems to do the trick. Thanks. Now it appears correctly

image