[NTG-context] Ligatures in EB Garamond
pragma at wxs.nl
Mon Jan 18 20:22:57 CET 2016
On 1/18/2016 1:46 PM, Jan U. Hasecke wrote:
> Am 18.01.2016 um 11:09 schrieb Hans Hagen:
>> On 1/18/2016 10:16 AM, Jan U. Hasecke wrote:
>>> Am 17.01.2016 um 20:05 schrieb Hans Hagen:
>>>> On 1/16/2016 3:58 PM, Jan U. Hasecke wrote:
>>>>> Am 16.01.2016 um 13:31 schrieb Schmitz Thomas A.:
>>>>>> Please provide a minimal example of your problem. It’s impossible to
>>>>>> help when we have no clue what you’re doing.
>>>>> Sorry, of course.
>>>>> After setting up a mwe I found that it is a font related issue.
>>>>> When I don't specify a font, it works. --> example.tex
>>>>> When I choose EB Garamond, it does not work. -- example-Garamond.tex
>>>>> I confirmed this behaviour in my real setup.
>>>> don't assume that ligatures are always real ligatures ... in that font
>>>> it's just kerning .. this kind of works okay:
>>> I am confused as the specimen of EB Garamond mentions (real) ligatures.
>>> They are listed as glyphs.
>> maybe the archaic st ligature is a precomposed but f f l i aren't done
>> that way but by either kerning or replacement of individual glyphs +
>> kerning (there are many methods for this) ... also, 'liga' might mean
>> ligature but in practice is used for all kind of things ... in opentype
>> 'ligature substitution' is just a many-to-one replacement but that
>> doesn't mean that 'liga' uses that ... welcome to the inconsistent open
>> type mess
> Mh, yes. :-(
> Two additional questions. Shall I file a bugreport for this issue? What
> would be the right words: please provide real ligature glyphs instead of
> composed ones?
there are many fonts out that that do similar things replacing f an i by
different shapes, or overlaying, or kerning, or replacing by one char,
looking forward (from f to i) or backward (from i to f) ... as all is
technically possible/permitted nothing is a bug (but there might be
occasional differences between hyphenation although quite some effort
went into getting that kind of right ... and it makes a good topic for
complex hard to follow boring presentations (see attachment)
(btw, sometimes glyphs get funny non standard names in which case
roundtrip copy/paste becomes a mess)
> EB Garamond is a free font also in the sense free of charge. But what
> can I expect when I buy a commercial font? I would be quite annoyed when
> I buy a font which does not provide the features in a way that I can use
> them in ConTeXt.
you can expect the same ... in fact you can also expect type1 -> otf
converted fonts with hardly any use of opentype features
> Is there a font quality page on the Wiki with a feature comparison?
that would be nice (has been discussed)
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 97603 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ntg-context