Recent changes to bugs

#43 Glyphs (and ligatures) missing in bold versions

Peter Baker — Fri, 24 Apr 2020 22:54:08 -0000

There is a major revision to Junicode underway at https://github.com/psb1558/Junicode-New, and most new features will be included in that version rather than the version hosted here. The new version is not ready for prime time, but I have added a "legacy" folder there, where I will leave bug fixes and minor enhancments to Junicode (especially to the bold and bold italic faces, which because of their relatively small size are easier to work with than regular and italic. The changes to bold italic mentioned by Carsten are now included in the version of bold italic found there, and there are also some enhancements to bold. https://github.com/psb1558/Junicode-New/tree/master/legacy. All font files for the new Junicode will include the complete MUFI character set, as requested by Daniel Werning, but this will take some months to complete. (However, work is going faster now that I am confined to the house full-time.)

#49 Some combinations of three combining diacritical marks

Peter Baker — Fri, 24 Apr 2020 22:39:18 -0000

I don't know how I missed this issue when it first came up. Your diagnosis is right, though there are further complications having to do with Unicode normalization. All this will be fixed in the major remake of Junicode currently underway at https://github.com/psb1558/Junicode-New, under the name JuniusX.

#43 Glyphs (and ligatures) missing in bold versions

Carsten — Thu, 23 Apr 2020 11:58:34 -0000

Since I'm working with diplomatically transcribed medieval manuscripts in German in my thesis, stuff like vͤ (v with e superscript) or uͦ (u with o superscript) appear frequently, and these aren't present in the bold italic style. For the time being I'm using \stackrel to manually align the missing superscripts. This doesn't look perfect (superscripts are too low and slightly off to the left), but it works. I'd be glad if native combining superscript letters were added sometime.

#50 Access to precomposed accented metrical symbols

Peter Baker — Wed, 22 Apr 2020 19:50:28 -0000

It never occurred to me to provide this feature, but it makes sense. I'll look into it.

Access to precomposed accented metrical symbols

Carsten — Wed, 22 Apr 2020 19:25:09 -0000

I can't make × (multiply) and – (en dash) combine with combining diacritics to form metrical symbols as provided in U+F700 to U+F71C in both XeLaTeX and LibreOffice Writer (compare attached file), using Junicode 1,002. Looking at the glyph properties of × as well as the precomposed metrical-symbol counterparts in Fontforge, it looks like there are no ligature rules defined. If I recall, this was not an issue in earlier versions of the font.

#49 Some combinations of three combining diacritical marks

lucius — Sun, 02 Feb 2020 17:27:59 -0000

After further investigation, I suspect this is because there is already a ligature defined for some combinations with two marks? For example, there is a ligature at U+022B, which is "o uni0308 uni0304". So maybe this ligature is substituted first, and it lacks an anchor for additional marks?

Some combinations of three combining diacritical marks

lucius — Sun, 02 Feb 2020 13:58:01 -0000

When combining multiple diacritic marks, some combinations of three combining marks do not look right. In the attached image, you will see the problematic ones in column 5. The positioning of the third mark is slightly off.
Note that some combinations with four marks do look right (row at the bottom).

(The attached image is a screenshot of LibreOffice.)

#48 Cyrillic glyphs

Peter Baker — Sat, 19 Oct 2019 18:34:10 -0000

status: open --> closed

Cyrillic glyphs

Steven Hoxville — Sat, 19 Oct 2019 18:08:58 -0000

This font is very beautiful, but without Cyrillic

Cyrillic glyphs

Steven Hoxville — Sat, 19 Oct 2019 18:08:58 -0000

Ticket 48 has been modified: Cyrillic glyphs
Edited By: Peter Baker (psb1558)
Status updated: u'open' => u'closed'