Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Shaperglot reporting missing punctuation? #66

Open
yanone opened this issue May 8, 2024 · 5 comments
Open

Shaperglot reporting missing punctuation? #66

yanone opened this issue May 8, 2024 · 5 comments

Comments

@yanone
Copy link
Contributor

yanone commented May 8, 2024

I was under the impression that shaperglot would also report on characters missing in a font.
The attached font is missing », yet neither Fontbakery’s shape_languages check nor an explicit shaperglot check Maname-Regular.ttf fr_Latn complain about the missing glyph.

Maname-Regular.ttf.zip

@simoncozens
Copy link
Collaborator

Shaperglot just checks base characters.

@yanone
Copy link
Contributor Author

yanone commented May 8, 2024

I vaguely remember having talked about this a while back. Should it not maybe check everything except auxiliary?

@yanone
Copy link
Contributor Author

yanone commented May 8, 2024

Could the characters sets to check maybe be parameters of the check() method?

For instance, the GF_Latin_African glyphset even includes auxiliary characters, so ideally those would be checked as well. cc @moyogo

If shaperglot is the wrong place for this, I would instigate a new or revised fontbakery check, but it would really just duplicate functionality already existing in shaperglot.

@moyogo
Copy link
Contributor

moyogo commented May 8, 2024

If a language uses » and a font doesn’t have it, that font doesn’t support that language.

The gflanguages punctuation data should be doublechecked but, at least for Latin, there’s a common set, plus or minus the variation of ‘ ’ “ ” « », or ¿ ¡.

Auxiliary is not well defined and gflanguages inherited the contradictions and inconsistencies from the sources it copied data from. The African Latin auxiliary data was narrowed down to historical use that may still occur.

Shaperglot should likely only check shaping of auxiliary chars if present, and maybe warn if not missing.

@vv-monsalve
Copy link

vv-monsalve commented Sep 13, 2024

Shaperglot just checks base characters.

In this case, wouldn't the identified inconsistencies impact the results?

For instance, some languages do not include uppercase (or accented) letters in the base characters. e.g. bg_Cyrl

Could this lead to misleading results?

exemplar_chars {
  base: "а б в г д е ж з и й к л м н о п р с т у ф х ц ч ш щ ъ ь ю я"
  auxiliary: "{а̀} ѐ ё ѝ {о̀} {у̀} {ъ̀} ы ѣ э {ю̀} {я̀} ѫ"
  marks: "◌̀ ◌̆"
  numerals: "- , % + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9"
  punctuation: "- – — , ; : ! ? . … \' ‘ ‚ \" “ „ ( ) [ ] @ * /№"
  index: "А Б В Г Д Е Ж З И Й К Л М Н О П Р С Т У Ф Х Ц Ч Ш Щ Ю Я"
}

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants