I’m implementing basic IPA in Ysabeau and have just filled out the IPA tab in Glyphs App. However, I noticed a significant number of glyphs in ipa.type.it missing from that tab. Wouldn’t it make sense to include all of those in the IPA tab in Glyphs?
Also, it’s annoying to design combining characters like the tie bar or combining accents when Glyphs doesn’t display them as combined. Could that be implemented in Glyphs? Perhaps with a toggle in the bottom right as for kerning…
For instance, I’m rather unhappy with how the tie bar looks between d and ezh (/d/breveinverteddoublecomb/ezh). Font Book shows that to me (see below) but Glyphs doesn’t. I’m not sure how to fix it — perhaps with a precomposed ligature…?
The safest way to make sure it looks as you want is indeed to make a precomposed ligature, the same way you presumably already have precomposed glyphs for ã, ç, etc. (as most fonts do) – that will also be reflected in Glyphs’ edit view if you have ligatures turned on in the feature list.
With Window → Text Preview, you can check the appearance of the mark the same way FontBook would render it.
A ligature makes sense when the number of pairs you intend to support is small. Otherwise, you might want to try dynamically sizing and positioning the mark as outlined here:
Glyphs wants the bottom tiebar /doublebrevebelowcomb/ to have a _bottom anchor, but no _top anchor in the top tiebar /breveinverteddoublecomb/. This apparently leads to the former behaving badly, latching onto the bottom anchor of the first letter of the pair, whereas the latter works more or less as advertised. I manually removed the anchor from the former, which fixes the problem. (It’s still not too pretty in the combination /m/doublebrevebelowcomb/n/, but I won’t complain.)
The _bottom anchor, yes. I heard it makes sense to have a bottom anchor so marks could be placed under the tiebar. (Conversely, the top tiebar could use a top anchor.)
Have you tried if it works to attach something to the double accents? I just tested it in FontGoggles and it seem that if I type “a/breveinverteddoublecomb/dieresiscomb/a”, it is reordered to “a/dieresiscomb/breveinverteddoublecomb/a”.
And I just saw that the two glyph names are not consistent. I’m inclined to fix this. But found many more examples like this. Need to think about this.
The ALA-LC transliteration, used in many library catalogues, uses t͡͏̇s (0074 0361 034F 0307 0073) for ҵ, not to be confused with the same sequence without 034F COMBINING GRAPHEME JOINER which gets 0307 reordered before 0361: ṫ͡s, or not to be confused with the similar sequence t︠̇s︡ with ligature half left and ligature half right which might be used for legacy reasons.
