-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 105
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
Checks name/fullfontname, name/postscriptname and name/match_familyname_fullfont falsely reject abbreviated font names #2254
Comments
As one additional thing to flag here (this can be split into a different issue if it makes more sense), the text of check
However, in this particular static instance:
So, it seems like the text is either mixing those strings up, or possibly the values of |
Note: We need to standardize short-versions of canonical names and then I can make all fontbakery checks adhere to that as well. |
Per our call today, we need a standard way to abbreviate font naming. I mentioned that we might follow the cited by the GlyphsApp Naming Tutorial with the header "The PostScript Names", which are from an earlier technical note on naming for PostScript, from Adobe (see page 27). The one downside is that they are very short, and therefore not always very easy to understand. Would the average user know that "Sm Bd" is "SemiBold"?
|
If this became a real standard, applications could display the long names whenever the short names are used. One problem with this table is that not all entries map to our current set of not-shortened canonical names. |
Well... the ideal solution would be for the applications to lift the maximum length restriction on name entries. But we have to deal with legacy applications... |
I think a set of Short/Medium/Full names would be better, so for things that are too long when full, but very short so almost undecipherable, and medium is not too long, that would be good |
@thundernixon please propose medium names :) |
Example of where medium names are useful: "Encode Sans SemiExpanded Black" is too many pixels wide to fit in the MS Word font menu, where the style of the font itself is shown, along with the name. For this, I've shortened names in the I'll write down a list of medium-sized abbreviations that I think work well and share them here for discussion in a bit. |
thanks! |
My proposalBackground: Proposed system
Prefixes (These have no trailing space, e.g. DemiBold)
New names (not included on Adobe's list)
Of course, there will still be custom names we can't account for, especially for experimental and display fonts and for currently-uncommon stylistic axes like Grade. Still, this list might be a helpful starting point for extending the checks listed in this issue. Open questions:
|
Still getting this issue, I suggest renaming the issue as the issues referenced are now known as: com.google.fonts/check/name/fullfontname |
Similarly my fonts fail this test when I abbreviate part of the typographic family name, as fontbakery tries to untagle the camelcasing:
Related? #2741 |
Should this same issue go under here? 🔥 FAIL: Check name table: TYPOGRAPHIC_FAMILY_NAME entries.
The name tables are: It needs the ID 16 since ID 1 has been abbreviated. |
I would like to follow up on this issue as I am running into it on several fonts that I'm working on. It really shouldn't be a "FAIL" IMO. |
Something else I'd like to suggest—that in the case of prefixed short names, like "Sm Bd", that we allow them to have no space between them, ala "SmBd". That saves an additional character, which might be very important 😄 |
I'd also like to suggest that for the prefix forms, like with Extra, it would be useful to be able to collapse to a single letter in extreme cases:
|
Observed behavior
As described in Issue #2179, nameIDs 4 & 6 sometimes have to be abbreviated to under 29 characters (the limit is slightly debated, but it's 31 maximum, based on sources I've read).
However, Check
159
simply seems to expect nameID4
to always equal a concatenation offamilyname_with_spaces
andstyle_with_spaces
, which are (I think) nameIDs1
&2
.Expected behavior
When nameIDs 4 & 6 are abbreviated to work in legacy software, nameIDs
1
&2
do not need to be abbreviated. Therefore, I think this test could be anINFO
or aWARN
, but should not be aFAIL
.Resources and exact process needed to replicate
You can build statics in Encode Sans with the build script
sources/scripts/build-statics.sh
......or visit the FontBakery report at https://github.com/thundernixon/Encode-Sans/blob/master/fonts/encodesanssemicondensed/static/EncodeSansSemiCondensed-ExtraLight-fontbakery-report.md
...but the relevant part is this:
🔥 FAIL: Check name table: FULL_FONT_NAME entries.
🔥 FAIL: Check name table: POSTSCRIPT_NAME entries.
🔥 FAIL: Does full font name begin with the font family name?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: