-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
Fix outline of gamma, fix pad_glyph(), add more kernings with smarter operation #97
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
b83e63f
953a344
48dc9dd
45b55b3
c64f89d
f4099e1
f324658
85b3886
4791fcc
44d44f2
b079c27
fd32443
4970053
5a6462d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The gamma change here looks like it is significant, rather than a pixel difference. The location doesn't look correct in the new version?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. In the charmap before the change, it seems that the position of gamma was shifted as a result of matplotlib's ax.text() trying to fit the outline within the frame. (A similar behavior can also be seen with U+0327. It seems to be an issue at a level different from the font's yMax height.) |
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Looking at the original handwriting sample, I agree that the spacing is better here. In particular, looking at "unevangelic" the letters are clearly distinct, whereas in the existing sample before this PR, they are on the verge of touching each other. 👍 to the diff. |

There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm worried we don't have much visual test coverage of the kerning between accented variants, and therefore want to be sure how how this lands for those characters, even though I can see that the expand call is done within the kern function.
Perhaps we need another sample which covers a bunch of the different languages that we have added support for?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, taking that point into consideration, in my previous fork, individual kerning was applied only to basic_latin.