|Subject:||Re: test font with both SVG and COLR table|
|Date:||Wed, 26 Jan 2022 17:48:32 +0000|
Apologies for a bit off-topic:
BTW, given that some folks at Apple don’t seem to be great fans of COLRv1, while Google isn’t a great fan of SVG, chances are that we’ll see the phasing out of "sbix" and "CBDT", but both COLRv1 and SVG will stick around — also because SVG allows bitmaps. Check out:- https://creativemarket.com/romanjusdado/2950202-Wooden-Tiles-Font
- https://creativemarket.com/helloimgreg/2330313-Stranger-Times-OpenType-SVG-Fontof suThis stuff is all bitmap-based, it’s all released fonts available on the market, and for now, they’re OT+SVG only. COLRv1 won’t replace them.This means that we’ll keep seeing OT+SVG fonts, OT+COLRv1 fonts and quite possibly _hybrid_ OT+SVG+COLRv1 fonts, which kind of make sense if the font vendor wants to make the users’ life simple.I’m just saying — the hybrid OT+SVG+COLRv1 font is not an eccentricity, I think it’ll be reality — especially if font editor vendors like FontLab make creation of such hybrids easy.With 4 separate color font flavors, the market acceptance was low (but still, people have made many such fonts). But as soon as those flavors are down to just 2, I think both will stick around. (Though I do see a reason for sbix to also exist, especially in Apple’s own HEIC flavor, not PNG, which they use on iOS).Best,AdamOn Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 5:07 PM Cosimo Lupo via FreeType development <email@example.com> wrote:Hi Werner and all,please find attached a test COLRv1 + SVG font, containing only one color glyph ✍ "WRITING HAND" (U+270D) emoji.The font was built using nanoemoji using the following command, from the root of the noto-emoji repository:$ nanoemoji --color_format=glyf_colr_1_and_picosvg --keep_glyph_names --pretty_print --family "Noto Color Emoji COLRv1 And SVG" svg/emoji_u270d.svgLet me know if that is what you are looking for.CheersCosimoOn Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 7:51 PM Werner LEMBERG <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Do you still need such a test font with SVG and COLR in it? I guess,
> we can make one if it's needed.
This would be still very helpful, yes. I think it would be helpful
for for fuzzing, too. A single glyph (besides '.notdef) would be
>> The question doesn't arise for serious `COLR` handling, as
>> described above. In case of the convenience `COLR` rendering,
>> `SVG` takes precendence.
> I think the table preference decision should be made by the
> application, or in the FT_LoadGlyph then with flags that allow
> separate selection?
Since the convenience stuff is tagged as experimental, and Alexei has
some serious concerns I probably won't change anything right now.
> FWIW, overall, I think if a font has COLRv1 and SVG, COLRv1 should
> have preference as it enables variable capabilities.
This is up to the application; there is no issue w.r.t. precendence at
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|