Fix typographic family name#5012
Conversation
|
@felipesanches could you please review? |
|
I'm not sure about this one. @simoncozens can you please take a look? @guidoferreyra, in the mean time, could you please add an entry to CHANGELOG.md describing this? |
|
I think this is right. We want both RIBBI and non-RIBBI fonts to work. Initially there was only RIBBI and to support non-RIBBI fonts in applications that only knew about RIBBI fonts, the workaround was to put family name + non-RIBBI component into name ID 1 and then put the "real" family name in name ID 16. But RIBBI fonts don't need the workaround and so don't have anything in name ID 16, they just have the real family name in ID 1. So yeah, look at 16 if it's non-RIBBI and if there's nothing there, assume it's RIBBI and look in 1. Horrible hack but the |
|
Just added a note to the changelog. Is the test good enough? This was the first time I wrote a test for a check 🤣 please take a look. |
|
It is still unclear to me what's going wrong on some of the CI jobs on Windows:
|
It only failed in today‘s commit 🤷♂️ |
|
It's not fontbakery related, I'm seeing it on other CIs that use pip install. |
3 participants
Description
When checking a typical family with RIBBI and non-RIBBI styles fonts can have or not ID 16.
In the current state of the check, is ignoring this case adding the empty value to the list of family names.
This is creating a false positive in most of the families I check. From my point of view, the check should try to get ID 16 and if is not present get ID 1 and check if there is more than one.
The test for this check was incomplete so I did an attempt to complete it, please take look and let me know if it’s good.
Checklist
CHANGELOG.md