Inappropriate I2305 and I2300 messages

[ArchivePoster]

Posted by: BobH
         

For reasons I don't think are relevant to this issue, we have chosen in the Doulos SIL and other of our Latin Unicode fonts to encode the glyph named "uni01B3.RtHook" and leave unencoded the glyph named "uni01B3".  That is, the cmap for U+01B3 points to uni01B3.RtHook, and an OpenType or Graphite feature can be used to show uni01B3 if wanted. As far as I can tell this does not violate any font standards or conventions.

 

However, FV is complaining:

 

I2305	The post name has an unexpected value	glyph = 1460, char = U+FFFF, name = uni01B3
I2300	The post name isn't in uniXXXX or uXXXXX format and there is no Adobe Glyph List entry	glyph = 1461, char = U+01B3, name = uni01B3.RtHook

         

[ArchivePoster]

Posted by: fontguy
         

Could be worse, it's just an "Info" . . . I think it used to be a warning or error. I think all it's doing is comparing to the Adobe Glyph List and flagging any inconsistencies. It's of no consequence, and the "Info" is not suggesting that it violates any standards or conventions -- just a kind of "FYI". If it were marked as a Warning or Error I would be more concerned.
         

[ArchivePoster]

Posted by: Thomas Phinney
         

I suppose that this is technically within the spec of the Adobe glyph naming guidelines, but it is a very unconventional usage, and it's totally appropriate for the Font Validator to issue a warning in such a case. If I was examining a font and saw glyph names/encoding set up as described, my assumption would be that it was unintentional and an error. Good on FV.

 

T

         

[ArchivePoster]

Posted by: BobH
         

OK, I agree it is unconventional usage. And I don't mind the warning. But I suggest the text of the warnings is misleading and could be improved.  As currently worded, they made us go looking for errors in our font structure that weren't there.

 

(And particularly the bogus reference to U+FFFF in I2305 -- that one really had us going for a while!)

         

[ArchivePoster]

Posted by: John Hudson
         
char = U+FFFF simply means the glyph is unencoded, since U+FFFF is the official *not a character* character
         

[Tags:]

Jump to: Please select a destination: ----------------------------- News and announcements ----------------------------- => Announcements from the forum’s moderators => News from the font industry ----------------------------- Type design and font technology ----------------------------- => Principles of type design => OpenType Layout feature development => Hinting => Font Formats and OpenType => Web font embedding => Font licensing ===> Electronic EULA Abstract (EEULAA) ----------------------------- Education and collaboration ----------------------------- => Work: Offers => Work: Looking for => Education: Offers => Education: Looking for => Typographic Events and Conferences ----------------------------- FontLab products ----------------------------- => News from FontLab => FontLab Studio ===> FontLab Studio Problems ===> FontLab Studio Tips and Tricks ===> FontLab Studio Wish List ===> FontLab Studio Public Preview => Fontographer ===> Fontographer Problems ===> Fontographer Wish List => TypeTool => AsiaFont Studio => TransType => ScanFont => SigMaker => Other Products ----------------------------- Photofont products ----------------------------- => BitFonter => Photofont WebReady => Photofont Start => Photofont ID => Photofont QX => The Photofont technology ----------------------------- Adobe Type products ----------------------------- => Adobe FDK for OpenType (AFDKO) ----------------------------- Apple Font products ----------------------------- => Apple Font Tools ----------------------------- Microsoft Typography products ----------------------------- => Microsoft Font Validator => Microsoft Visual OpenType Layout Tool (VOLT) => Microsoft Web Embedding Fonts Tool (WEFT) => Microsoft Visual TrueType (VTT) ----------------------------- Other products and Python scripting ----------------------------- => Python scripting => FontTools/TTX => Other font-related tools ----------------------------- Special interest groups ----------------------------- => SBL Fonts ===> SBL Hebrew ===> SBL Greek ===> SBL BibLit ----------------------------- FAQ and TechNotes ----------------------------- => OpenType Layout feature development FAQ and TechNotes => Hinting FAQ and TechNotes => Font Formats and OpenType FAQ and TechNotes => Web font embedding FAQ and TechNotes => Font licensing FAQ and TechNotes => FontLab Studio FAQ and TechNotes => Fontographer FAQ and TechNotes => TypeTool FAQ and TechNotes => AsiaFont Studio FAQ and TechNotes => TransType FAQ and TechNotes => ScanFont FAQ and TechNotes => SigMaker FAQ and TechNotes => BitFonter FAQ and TechNotes => Photofont WebReady FAQ and TechNotes => Photofont Start FAQ and TechNotes => Photofont ID FAQ and TechNotes => Photofont QX FAQ and TechNotes ----------------------------- Archive (MSN Groups) ----------------------------- => Archive: Old FontLab forum ===> Archive: FontLab Tips and Tricks ===> Archive: FontLab Bugs and Problems ===> Archive: FontLab Wish List ===> Archive: FontLab Announcements => Archive: Old Microsoft Font Validator group => Archive: Old Microsoft VOLT group => Archive: Old Microsoft VTT group ===> Archive: VTT Downloads ===> Archive: VTT Support ===> Archive: VTT Suggestions => Archive: Old Microsoft WEFT group ===> Archive: WEFT III ===> Archive: EOT for Email => Archive: Old SBL Fonts group ===> Archive: SBL Hebrew ===> Archive: SBL Greek ----------------------------- Various ----------------------------- => fontlab.com — the FontLab website => forum.fontlab.com — this forum => Other Topics