Tabular and proportional small caps


I want to have both tabular and proportional small caps, the problem is that my default figures as well as default small caps figures are tabular. I have pnum feature which makes the default (tabular) figires to proportional. The issue is that when my smcp feature and my pnum feature are both used, I got small caps letters with normal proportional figures.

So my question is how to make small caps proportional figures. The only “solution” that I thought of was using a different lnum feature which should be used separately:

sub zero.smcp by;   

but I’m sure that it’s not right. Is there any proper way of dealing with this, or you find it dumb to have both proportional and tabular small caps figures.

And while I’m still here, I want to ask if the small caps tabular should be the same width as the normal tabular. I have done it like this, but I guess you can imagine that the spacing between the small caps tabular letters is enormous, so I was wondering if this is right?

Thanks in advance, and sorry for my english…

A few suggestions.

First, unify your suffixes. Always use .sc for example, not .smcp once, then .sc another time. Makes it easier to keep track of everything, spot and fix problems.

Secondly, if you want Glyphs to automate the features, use .lf for proportional lining figures.

Thirdly, if you are combining features, and still want to make use of the automation, add all suffixes in their order in the OT features as displayed in Font Info > Features. So, e.g., if your number features come before the small cap features, you would use

I am not aware of an accepted standard for this. So whatever fits your intended design best.

No they should not be. Given that they are smaller now, change the tabular spacing to fit the new size, proportionally to the full size.

I was under the impression multiple periods in glyph names are not allowed in the OpenType spec.

There is no limit on how many periods you have in your name. Normally everything after the first period is ignored for character reconstruction. So you can’t do ‘f.ss01_f.ss02’ because that would result in a single ‘f’.