[review] Add support for roundtripping Glyphs/UFO custom name table entries. #827
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks for the PR! Can you please rebase on main branch (or merge origin/main into yours), that should fix the setup error you're seeing in the "lint" job. |
bramstein
force-pushed
the
bs-name-table-entries
branch
from
e4d7a31 to
ccc662f
Compare
|
regression tests took ages, I'm not sure what's going on there. But if anything related to this PR has changed that made them fail, then it's for good and they should automatically fix themselves after merging the PR to main. If not, we'll take it from there. |
This was referenced Feb 16, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We have some Glyphs source files with custom name table entries that weren't preserved when converting to UFO. This PR parses the Glyphs
<nameid> <platform_id>? <encoding_id>? <language_id>?; <string>format and creates UFOopenTypeNameRecords(and vice versa).I added a new test that covers all the different combinations the Glyphs name table entry format supports. In the case the Glyphs name table entry only specifies a name identifier and string default values are used for the other parameters. The default parameters are not removed when converting from UFO -> Glyphs, so roundtripping a Glyphs will not be literally identical but functionally identical.
This is a partial fix for #633.