I wonder why you decided to change the name of the dotlessi and dotlessj, and if/in what situations the glyph name might be used instead of the unicode value.
I try to put the most important part of the name at the beginning. That is easer to read and helps in cases where there is not much space and the name would be dotl..s01.
That makes sense internally, but my question pertains to how glyph names work in exported fonts. Letâs say I named my lowercase a âoxâ, but kept the unicode value. Are there situations where this might cause problems?
idotless is automatically renamed to the production name dotlessi at export time.
There are issues with older versions of OS X (up to 10.4), and copying and pasting in Adobe Acrobat (I believe, also only older versions), and probably some other older software titles, which expect a certain naming scheme for the glyph. I have not tried ox for a yet, though.
idotless is automatically renamed to the production name dotlessi at export time.
Ok. Iâm doing the final export and mastering from FLS, so it seems Iâm loosing a lot of the functionality when I import/export. It would be great if Glyphs was more transparerent about the stuff that happens underneath the hood.
There are issues with older versions of OS X (up to 10.4), and copying and pasting in Adobe Acrobat
Thanks. That answers my question.
1 Like
You can control the production name a glyph gets renamed into via your own Glyph Data XML: Roll your own glyph data | Glyphs
Would it be possible to have the glyphs import script convert glyph names to production names? As of now, some do and some donât.
you mean the FLS import script? I recommend to export a font and open that in FLS. That is the best option if you like to do TT hinting in FLS.
I had the experience that when working in a non-Glyphs-exclusive workflow you can run into compatibility issues. E.g. when generating accented letters in Glyphs 2 with a file which still uses the standard naming scheme, or when I was not really able to use Adobeâs Character Sets because of Glyphsâ style of naming certain characters.
I can totally understand the logic behind the different name that you started to implement, but do you think it might be possible to let the user choose if he wants to use the standard names or the nice Glyphs names when starting a project?
I improved the composition algorithm to pick up none âcombâ accents, too. This should fix this in most cases.
Iâm afraid donât understand what you mean, Georg.
I improved the composition algorithm âŠ
What is the composition algorithm?
⊠to pick up none âcombâ accents, too. This should fix this in most cases.
How is this helping me & arialcrime with our issues?
The algorithm that picks the components if you run âMake Component Glyphsâ.
That helps if you donât have the combining accents in your font, but the spacing ones (which used to be the default in Glyphs 1).
That helps if you donât have the combining accents in your font, but the spacing ones (which used to be the default in Glyphs 1).
The issue isnât that Glyphs assume combining accents. The issue is that there is no reliable way to go back and forth between Glyphs and Fontlab without loosing font info and scrambling glyph names, even though you claim so with the Glyphs Import/Export scripts.
What do you need to do in FLS? If you do the TT instructions, I recommend to export as .ttf and import that in FLS.
But thatâs going forth, not back.
If you go FLS > Glyphs, you can fix most of the issues by Glyph > âUpdate Glyph Infoâ.