Post #1763563
2026-03-10 10:44 UTC
Replies (4)
-
@drj@typo.social 2026-03-10 11:05
@marsidesino@typo.social Have you considered `dlig` for Discretionary Ligatures? https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/opentype/spec/features_ae#dlig
-
@drj@typo.social 2026-03-10 14:11
@marsidesino@typo.social Yes, i suppose. I would expect conventional ligatures to go in `liga`. The point you raise about `dlig` applies to _any_ use of `dlig`. I think it's a fair point: my "discretion" is limited to having all of them or none of them. And yet, fonts do use it; i see TT Commons has `dlig` lookups for /c_t /i_j /r_t /r_f /s_t As a font engineer and/or designer, i do see the simplicity of just sticking it in a Stylistic Set.
-
@paulvanderlaan@typo.social 2026-03-10 11:29
@marsidesino@typo.social As a non-native English reader I find that character completely unreadable I’m afraid. If you put this in the locl feature it will be forced upon unsuspecting readers.
-
@drj@typo.social 2026-03-10 14:43
@marsidesino@typo.social @paulvanderlaan@typo.social i am not sure it is a good idea to prioritise a font's aesthetics based on native speakers. Particularly of English, where there are more non-native users than native. But it is an aesthetic decision, not a technical one. And on the other hand, we have to try out new symbols somewhere, and for conventional writing systems that somewhere is in fonts; so i assume the decision to try out this _exempli gratia_ symbol was already made, and we were moving on to how it should be implemented in a font.