On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 00:14:03 -0500, Peter Constable
<petercon@...> wrote:

> In a cursive Latin OpenType font, you don't use features such as 'fina'
> that are used for Arabic. Rather, you add lookups to select contextual
> forms and associate them with the 'calt' feature. These lookups will
> need to include logic to determine what glyphs to use according to word
> position or adjacent glyphs. (Word position isn't hard; you can decide
> how complex you want to get in picking alternates according to preceding
> or following characters.)

Google helped with "calt" -- it seems to signify "contextual
alternatives". Thank you.

[nb]

>> Unfortunately, fonts for such use are likely to require extensions of
>> existing standards, perhaps specifying permissible locations on each
>> glyph for joining, as well as initial, medial, final and standalone
>> forms, and perhaps other data.

> I'm not at all sure what you're referring to. There are several cursive
> Latin OpenType fonts, but none required extensions of any standards.

Basically, I was concerned with joins between consecutive letters that
look best; I find it quite hard to believe that free cursive font design
for calligraphic continuous-stroke rendering would have a "one position
fits all" place to join almost any letter to almost any other. On further
thought, the basic letter shapes in calligraphic text at least sometimes
are consistent and uniform, except where the writer chooses to
intentionally depart from that consistency. That consistency would, I now
think, eliminate the need for variant letterforms.

[kerning pairs suggested]

> Um, no. Kerning adjusts positions of glyphs, not their shapes.

Surely. Ordinarily, the only reason (other than ligatures) for pairing
specfic letters as part of font data does seem to be letter spacing. I was
thinking of pairing for a different reason, and should have used kerning
pairs as an illustrative analogy rather than using the term directly.

> Getting the right connections for Latin has mostly to do with getting
> the right shapes.

Peter, your thoughtful and helpful consideration is much appreciated. As
well, I'm glad to be among world experts who are kind enough to read the
thoughts of a dilettante/amateur!

Best regards,

--
Nicholas Bodley /*|*\ Waltham, Mass.
The curious hermit -- autodidact and polymath