Post #1807998
2026-03-08 18:42 UTC
@frankrolf @justvanrossum Ah, well, that looks like a more recent use of the terminology. My point isn’t so much that it’s wrong or confusing to use “production name” when referring to final names, but that it’s also not wrong or confusing to use the names I’m talking about. The fact that recent tools have different conventions doesn’t change the fact that “production” (or “friendly”) ➝ “final” was (IMO) conventional and sensible for quite a while, and still familiar to many people. The RoboFont docs have always made perfect sense to me! 🙂
Replies (2)
-
@nicksherman@typo.social 2026-03-08 19:05
@slye @frankrolf @justvanrossum I’m guessing you didn’t see my reply in the tangle of reply threads on this, but there is some logic behind all the confusion: https://typo.social/@nicksherman/116191055518112530
-
@tphinney@typo.social 2026-03-09 06:30
@slye @frankrolf @justvanrossum As Chris says, “production” vs “final” was how we referred to them back in the 90s when the Glyph Order and Alias DB file was first conceived and used. We called the font dev process “font production” and that’s why the names used during dev were “production” names. That said, I am also the first to agree that “production” is ambiguous and I think “friendly” vs “final” is better, clearer wording.