bugFree UCS Outline Fonts - Bugs: bug #23580, Letterlike characters: design


bug #23580: Letterlike characters: design

Submitter:  Steve White <Stevan_White>
Submitted:  Sat 14 Jun 2008 11:16:05 AM UTC
Category:  character range Severity:  3 - Normal
Item Group:  glyph(s) ugly Status:  Fix posted
Privacy:  Public Assigned to:  Stevan_White
Open/Closed:  Open Release:  * 2006-01-26
* Mandatory Fields

Add a New Comment Rich Markup

Wed 20 Sep 2017 01:07:04 PM UTC, comment #2: 

These issues should have been resolved by the filling out of the Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols ranges.

Steve White <Stevan_White>
Group administrator
Mon 27 Oct 2008 07:13:46 PM UTC, comment #1: 

These characters make more sense in the context of the Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols range

See also bug 23056

The plan will be to take glyphs from that range, which in turn are adapted from the LaTeX fonts.

But there are still screwy problems:  h-bar for instance is meant to be a math symbol, in an italic face.  What should be its glyph in SerifItalic?  Even more italic?  Even more oblique?  This seems silly.  (I think this whole business of making Unicode slots based on letter style was very questionable anyway.) 

The Unicode samples show Planck's constant and h-bar as italic letters, but some of the descriptions for other characters in this range explicitly specify an italic style.  And at least one sample, u+2139, shows a very bold glyph in the medium roman.  Should the bold version be even bolder?

In those cases, I'll just say the italic and roman versions are the same.

Steve White <Stevan_White>
Group administrator
Sat 14 Jun 2008 11:16:05 AM UTC, original submission:  

This is from Jacob Poon's report of 2007-10,

The letterlike range has design issues, because it specifies styled letters that are to be implemented within a font style.
Often it isn't clear what to do.

The script glyphs and planck constants in Letterlike Symbols (U+2100-214F) in the non-italic fonts do not fit the design characteristic of the font. The glyphs in non-italic fonts should be strighten up.

        ? I agree that the script glyphs are very slanted, even for handwriting.
        Where did they come from?
        Maybe there is a less slanty script version.
        The Planck glyphs are arguable.

The bold versions of script and black-letter glyphs (U+2100-214F) have different stroke paths from the non-bold counterparts. The bug does not exist in other font families.

        ? The script and blackletter glyphs in bold are from different faces than the non-bold counterparts.  I don't see this as necessarily a bad thing.  Not all faces ought to have a bold version.
        And then there is the general question of how to handle different face designs within a single face of a font...

Steve White <Stevan_White>
Group administrator


(Note: upload size limit is set to 16384 kB, after insertion of the required escape characters.)

Attach Files:

No files currently attached


Depends on the following items: None found

Items that depend on this one: None found


Carbon-Copy List
  • -email is unavailable- added by Stevan_White (Submitted the item)
  • -email is unavailable- added by Stevan_White

    There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.

    Only logged-in users can vote.


    Follow 3 latest changes.

    Date Changed by Updated Field Previous Value => Replaced by
    2017-09-20 Stevan_White StatusProceeding Fix posted
    2008-10-27 Stevan_White StatusNeed info Proceeding
    2008-06-14 Stevan_White Carbon-Copy- Added -email is unavailable-

    Back to the top

    Powered by Savane 3.13-4b48.
    Corresponding source code