Re: The current state of rendering and overlap
Skef Iterum <[email protected]> Tue, 19 Dec 2023 11:09:25 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.fonts.freetype.devel |
|---|---|
| Organization | Iterum Software Consulting LLC |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
CFF2 is released, has been for years. As far as I know there's no solid convention for ignoring unrecognized operators in a CharString, so this would be CFF2 minor 1 at best. Which would be years out in terms of support. Practically speaking I don't think this could wind up being a "this glyph has overlap" flag, as in CFF2 overlap is valid anywhere. If something were added it would be more like a "this glyph doesn't have overlap, you can optimize the rendering" flag. Behdad - there's no provision for a relevant flag in VARC currently, correct? (I'm not sure there was one in the glyf-based system, as I don't remember a place where the flag would have lived.) Skef On 12/19/23 10:53, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote: > Why? The sequence 0x0c 0x40 is reserved and not used for example. > > >> I'm afraid the horse has left the barn as far as that goes. >> >> Skef >> >>> On 12/19/23 04:23, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote: >>> I would suggest that CFF2 invent a special charstring to mark overlaps >>> with FT_OUTLINE_OVERLAP only when necessary. Let us know to implement >>> it in FreeType.