-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30
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
XML syntax to define glyph and ligature substitution rules #232
Comments
Isn't this what #106 is about? |
@alerque, see #106 (comment). I personally don't see any merit in rewriting fea in XML. It would end up just as complicated, just as limited, just as ambiguous as it is right now (e.g. what happens if kerning instructions in I assume the suggestion here would be of a much smaller scale than #106, and it would constutute a (partial) alternative to #106. |
Also, .fea is part of many projects that use UFO. It serves a purpose. |
And what of it? It's part of many projects precisely because UFO lacks native means to describe these features. It doesn't have to stay that way forever though. |
Then add it to the wish list for UFO4. There is no need to break all the projects running on UFO3 just for a perceived cleaner way of storing the data. |
I never said I want to break any projects. I created this issue as a wish for UFO4. But even if I expected this to be added to UFO3 somehow, I don't think the projects would break, because tools that wouldn't support this part of the spec would just keep relying on |
Ligature substitution (e.g.
sub A gravecomb by Agrave
) and other glyph substitution (e.g. replacingi
withdotlessi
when an a combining mark above follows) can currently only be defined infeatures.fea
.In my case, at least right now, these things are pretty much the only the only reason why I have
features.fea
files at all. It would be nice if there existed a more UFOy way of defining such replacements.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: