<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Thursday 29 January 2015 08:17 PM,
Dave Crossland wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEozd0w0JYs3ZTWQdxun_7-5t+dxjRD8NvGBjTxAuR362UcVGw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p dir="ltr">AFDKOs libre version doesn't include the
removeOverlap() method, so you need something else to do that,
and fontforge improved its version substantially last year. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Fontforge also improved its UFO support, such that
you can use it to develop UFO+FDK projects (like Adobe Source
Sans+Serif)</p>
<p dir="ltr">However, Fontforge has supported importing and
exporting fea files for many years, and is scriptable for
command line use. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Before deciding to switch, I recommend setting up
both a fontforge and fdk based workflow from the same source and
comparing the resulting binaries, and also considering how
maintainable and comprehensive each is. </p>
</blockquote>
Agree with you. We will do comparison.<br>
I am thinking for at least one change is to use makeotf for building
ttf. I think OTM and Fontlab using it in the backend. So good if we
can build Lohit ttf also with it.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Pravin Satpute<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEozd0w0JYs3ZTWQdxun_7-5t+dxjRD8NvGBjTxAuR362UcVGw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jan 29, 2015 3:18 AM, "Pravin Satpute"
<<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:psatpute@redhat.com">psatpute@redhat.com</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Hi All,<br>
<br>
I was thinking for this from some time now. <br>
Reasons:<br>
1. Lots of well know fonts are using AFDKO. AFAIK Adobe
fonts are build using AFDKO.<br>
2. Things we required in Lohit specifically, easy to read
feature files and final ttf with Adobe glyph naming
guideline looks easily manageable with AFDKO. (<em>GlyphOrderAndAliasDB
and .Fea</em>)<br>
3. AFDKO feature file compilation is much better than
Fontforge. Noticed this earlier with OTM errors. Also while
compiling i found number of error not identified by
fontforge.<br>
4. All command line, so we can automate very nicely.<br>
5. We will use fontforge only for outline related work.
Presently we are still using fontforge for OpenType rules
writing, i have not faced any problem into it yet. But
perfect solution is we should write open type rules in .fea
file itself. This at least not targeting presently<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Pravin Satpute<br>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lohit-devel-list mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Lohit-devel-list@redhat.com">Lohit-devel-list@redhat.com</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/lohit-devel-list"
target="_blank">http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/lohit-devel-list</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>