I am getting different vertical metrics if I create an OTF or a Variable font from the same source. Why is this happening?
Merry Xmas!
Where/how do you see that?
I see it on fonts generated from Glyphs 3 but not 2, on websites.
Flip between Thin and Variable here and you see it easily here:
https://lettersfromsweden.se/font/eklips/
The variable font and the static font is generated from the same source with these settings:
Here is another font generated from Glyphs 2 where this does not happen.
https://lettersfromsweden.se/font/trim-poster/
(You can switch between Lean and Variable here)
Can you send us the .glyphs file?
1 Like
Sent, thanks!
I had a look at the files. The exact same values are written into all exported fonts, be it the variable file or the static files.
Presumably, the problem lies in how the browsers treat the fonts. By default, the typo values are taken for the variable fonts, and the typoLineGap is split in two, one half added at the top, the other at the bottom. That is why the the first baseline of the variable font only has an offset of 750+100=850. For the static fonts, Safari will prefer the hhea values, where the first baseline offset will be (ascender) 940 + (half line gap) 0 = 940.
That is why I strongly suggest the webfont strategy for the vertical metrics.
1 Like
Thanks for the explanation. Makes sense.
So how would you type the values in my scenario to make it work, because I have tried everything and it never works. It works when I leave it all to Glyphs and set NO values, but when I open the fonts that Glyphs automatically set the Vertical Metrics for and use them on a new font, the result is wrong again… haha.
Could you please type how in my scenario I would solve this problem, please?
-
hhea=typo -
use typo metricsON -
win= max and min in your font family (defines clipping border)
You can use the Vertical Metrics Manager script. Details in the tutorial.
1 Like
Got it, thanks so much Rainer. You are the best at explaining for dummies like me 
1 Like