# Intermediate layers, composite glyphs, inconsistent metrics: best practice? **URL:** \ **Category:** Glyphs\ **Created:** [September 16, 2026, 1:15pm UTC](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/t/intermediate-layers-composite-glyphs-inconsistent-metrics-best-practice/37289 "2026-09-16T13:15:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tgrace](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/eb8c5e/32.png) [@tgrace](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/u/tgrace)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2026, 1:15pm UTC](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/t/intermediate-layers-composite-glyphs-inconsistent-metrics-best-practice/37289/1 "2026-09-16T13:15:57Z")
Hello, In a Glyphs file containing light/bold masters I have an /e with a {600} layer. I also have /eacute and /acutecomb, each with no intermediate layer. The L and R sidebearings in each master of /eacute are ‘auto’. I generate an instance of a weight roughly corresponding to 600, and I notice that the R sidebearing of /eacute is larger than that of /e. Is this because there is no corresponding intermediate layer for /eacute? What is the best way to correct this and/or build composite characters to avoid this problem? Many thanks, Tom ---
**Author:** ![GeorgSeifert](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/user_avatar/forum.glyphsapp.com/georgseifert/32/259_2.png) [@GeorgSeifert](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/u/GeorgSeifert)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2026, 10:34pm UTC](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/t/intermediate-layers-composite-glyphs-inconsistent-metrics-best-practice/37289/2 "2026-09-16T22:34:10Z")
I just tested it and it works fine for me. Could you send me the file for testing? ---
**Author:** ![tgrace](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/eb8c5e/32.png) [@tgrace](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/u/tgrace)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2026, 7:03am UTC](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/t/intermediate-layers-composite-glyphs-inconsistent-metrics-best-practice/37289/4 "2026-09-17T07:03:28Z")
File sent 👍