Question about Glyph Order in Font View


In this screenshot, the GlyphOder in Font View is changed and I would like to know how it’s possible to add a line break after a specific Glyph (For example here, after the “Z” Uppercase )

That is possible with GlyphData.xml modification ? If yes, what is it ?
Thanks for your help

It seems possible. @TimAhrens can you explain?

You can do this with this GlyphData.xml:

It’s some kind of hack, though.

Also, my intention was not to add a line break, this is what Glyphs 3 (but not Glyphs 2) adds. I simply want to have the plain letters first and then the accented ones.

@GeorgSeifert It would be much better if this was simply a built-in option in Glyphs. I am pretty sure most designers don’t want plain and accented letters to be jumbled.

I personally don’t mind the line break. What matters to me is the order. We have had this discussion several times for many years – I believe sorting is much more powerful than filtering. Why not let users choose whether they work with sorting, with filtering, or both?

Thanks Tim,

I was already using this trick on Glyph2, but Glyph2 doesn’t add “line-break” where Glyph 3 seems to add some.

An option to add manually a line break after a specific Glyph could help to see more clearly when working with a large glyph set.

For the moment the only option I found to do that is to change SortName or Sub-Category to do that (but change Sub-Category is not a really good option)

The sorting algorithm is complex. But I can add specific settings. What else would be interring?

For me, the most important specific thing would be to keep the plain letters next to each other. Thinking about it, it would be good to have all non-composite glyphs first, then all composites (to be precise, the hybrid ones could go in-between). For each subcategory independently. Then I’d be quite happy already.

More generally speaking, we have three aspects to handle a glyph set:

  • Colour
  • Order (sorting)
  • Filtering

Each of these has its own benefits, of course. I think colour + order is already extremely powerful if done well.

How about adding the possibility to apply a filter as sorting criterion? Let’s say, if I option-click a filter then Glyphs would not hide the non-matching glyphs but simply put them after the matching ones (per category or sub-category, I suppose). No cluttered UI and it would be quite powerful (and I guess I wouldn’t even use filters normally any more).
Or, alternatively, temporarily colour the glyphs according to the filter if I click on it with a modifier key? Without hiding them, without changing the order, just colouring them, possibly disabling them so they can’t be selected, that could be very powerful.

1 Like

How about adding some syntactic extensions to the glyphOrder parameter?

  • lines starting with a # hash mark are used as headings
  • empty lines produce a “line break”

Like so (... is just a placeholder, not a special command):

1 Like

Interesting idea! I wouldn’t want to maintain that list as I work on the font, though.

Maybe adding wildcards and conditions?

# Letters, Latin

Plus, that same thing for list filters.

There is support for categories in glyphOrder. If you prefix a line with ** it will be used as a header.

So in the above example, replace the # with **

And it would be annoying to use a glyphData parameter just for a small change like this. I’ll think about it.

But I would not base the (automatic) sorting on the content of the layers (components or not) as the order would change too often.

How about a global glyph order, as a plain text file next to the GyphData.xml in the Info folder?

I don’t like the idea of having to specify each glyph in the list as I’d have to update that list every time I add a glyph.

What I want to achieve can be described in more abstract terms. Therefore, the solution should allow me to do so.

I think the sortName property is a better solution than a list.

I’d be happy to use sortName seems to be potentially pretty powerful, but so far I couldn’t manage to make it work in any reliable way (or at all).

The problem with the current solution, i.e. setting sortName in the GlyphData.xml is that you have to keep the other information a well, and it could become outdated. This is why my GlyphData.xml for Glyphs 2 does not work in Glyphs 3 any more. We are breaking the Don’t Repeat Yourself rule.

If it was possible to set something like this:
<glyph name="A" sortName="0_A"/>
in order to only overwrite the sortName for the A, and keep all the other information, that would be perfect.

If you are using TextMate, I can send send you a script to insert the glyph element from the original GlyphData.xml into your custom GlyphData.xml by name:

Looks interesting but the main problem, as I was trying to describe, is that my GlyphData.xml is not updated in case the built-in one in changes. So, it will have outdated information in it, because I have to specify information I don’t want to specify.

I’ll have a look at the custom data loading that you can only specify the values that you like to change. That way, it is less likely that you have old info in your file.