Anchor can now attach to differently named anchor?

1

I created an extra anchor named center_lowered besides the existing center anchor in a base glyph. In the composite glyph I saw that the anchor icon appeared in the composite glyph, and when I clicked on it this new anchor could be selected even though the anchor only appears in the base glyph. It has something to do with naming because naming this center_lowered instead hellokitty it no longer triggered the anchor icon in the composite glyph.

Screenshot 2024-03-28 at 08.17.21
Screenshot 2024-03-28 at 08.17.211022×714 71.7 KB

I just discovered this – is this a new feature?

2

Been around for a while. Underscore is the dot of anchors.

2 Likes
3

Well well well. How about that. That solves a lot of problems.

1 Like
4

Read this:

1 Like
5

What is really strange is that this function never came up in conversation the last time this one-to-many many-to-one anchor issue was discussed.

1 Like
6

I am finally getting to this. Creating new origin anchors like top_double works fine, but you cannot use new target anchors like _top_double. Why not? In my case I’d like to only have one top anchor in my base glyphs and all the messy anchors in the respective diacritics because the diacritics are all different and need individual placement of what would be a top_double anchor. The way it works now I would have to create alternate top_dieresis, top_macron, top_circumflex, &c. Very messy.

7

@GeorgSeifert Any comment on the above?

8

I tried to get this to work already. But it would need a big rewrite of the anchor code. I’ll keep this in mind for the next time I touch that code.

9

Sounds good. I’ll try my luck with origin anchors for now.