When I export my fonts (instances) to test in the InDesign Font folder, all my fonts are grouped in the same font family name as expected.
I removed these fonts from the InDesign font folder.
If I install these same fonts using Font Book, they appear to be all grouped under the same family name, but are not displayed this way in other programs.
In Adobe Illustrator (CS4), each font instance shows up as it’s own family. (The only weight being “Regular”). It is also the case in InDesign when the fonts are installed this way.
Does anyone know how I can create OTF fonts all in the correct family groups?
Is there another way to install fonts on a Mac that fixes this?
I am concerned about this because if I was to sell this font on MyFonts for instance, I’m sure the user would want their fonts to perform in this way and not clutter up the font list with individual fonts.
Has anyone else had a similar experience?
There are 9 weights from 3 masters. I have used no style-linking. Each instance has a name (15 Thin - 95 Heavy) and has the appropriate weight from the drop-down menu.
If I have missed something obvious (likely) perhaps a tutorial on the subject would help others?
Thanks,
Matt
The behaviour should work out of the box. Did you check in Fontbook that the family name is the same for all instances (cmd+i)? If not, it might be a bug in Glyphs.
The 9 instances are generated from a file with 3 masters. The font info Family name is set once in the “Font” section.
Each instance has a name beginning with a number convention similar to Univers (15, 25, 35, etc)
I wonder if this is a problem? Does the style name have to exactly match the weight name of the drop down menu?
What confuses me is how exporting fonts to InDesign’s font folder shows them in the family group, but after removing them from here, and installing them globally with Font Book, they each show up as individual families.
This is the problem. I quote this (read chapter 2.4): The FullName must be unique; numbers can be used in the name, but the name should not depend on them for uniqueness.
You can set the Full Name manually by using the postscriptFullName custom parameter. Or simply avoid numbers (at least in the first three letters of the style name). Or append them at the end of the style name.
To sum up; I have all my fonts beginning with the numbers, but also now have unique letters. “numbers can be used in the name, but the name should not depend on them for uniqueness”
I have called them 15 Hairline, 25 Thin, 35 Extra Light etc. This has installed perfectly in all programs I have tested without any custom parameters.
Mekka: Can I expect any problems in windows or other operating systems by using this naming convention? You say to set Full Name in custom parameters, but it seems to work without this, can I relax yet?
I wouldn't dare starting a style name with a number. It might work fine, but some legacy system set-up might act up. I can imagine a parser stopping at the first number it sees or refusing a name with numbers altogether. I'd just leave out the numbers.
I vaguely remember a similar case years ago, on MacOS 9, where such a Univers naming convention caused problems. I don’t remember the details though. It must be like a decade ago.
