Replies: 3 comments
-
Thanks. I'm now mostly up-to-date on this amusing little disconnect. sigh Is it perhaps worth putting a note here in the AFDKO docs? Something like:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Perhaps. I think most of us involved in the past discussions were assuming that the idea had enough momentum (and implementations) that the OT Spec would get updated, but that just kinda died out. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Note: I'm of the opinion that the OpenType Specification should change, but it's worth noting here.
The AFDKO Feature File Specification suggests that using the reserved word
NULL
as the replacement glyph in a Single Substitution rule, will remove the glyph from the input (example:sub X by NULL;
or the equivalentsub X;
).This is implemented in the binary OTF file with a Multiple Substitution lookup (lookup type 2) that has a 0-length replacement sequence. The current version of the OpenType specification has this to say:
haha.
Since I assume this has been going on for years, i think the OpenType specification should be corrected.
[i have also submityed a suggested correction to the OpenType spec, see linked issue in the GitHub log below]
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions