smc / gayathri

Gayathri Malayalam Typeface

എന്താണ് സ്വതന്ത്ര മലയാളം കമ്പ്യൂട്ടിംഗ്

"എന്റെ കമ്പ്യൂട്ടറിനു് എന്റെ ഭാഷ" എന്ന മുദ്രാവാക്യവുമായി, സ്വതന്ത്ര സോഫ്‍റ്റ്‍വെയറുകള്‍ അടിസ്ഥാനമാക്കി കമ്പ്യൂട്ടറില്‍ മലയാളം ഉപയോഗിക്കാന്‍ എല്ലാവരെയും പ്രാപ്തരാക്കുന്നതിനായി പ്രവര്‍ത്തിയ്ക്കുന്ന സന്നദ്ധപ്രവര്‍ത്തകരുടെ കൂട്ടായ്മാണു് സ്വതന്ത്ര മലയാളം കമ്പ്യൂട്ടിങ്ങ്

ഇത് സ്വതന്ത്രമലയാളം കമ്പ്യൂട്ടിങ്ങിന്റെ പ്രധാന ഡെവലപ്പ്മെന്റ് റെപ്പോസിറ്ററിയാണ്.കൂടുതല്‍ വിവരങ്ങള്‍ക്ക് http://wiki.smc.org.in കാണുക

---

What is Swathanthra Malayalam Computing

Swathanthra Malayalam Computing is a community of Free/Libre software developers who work for localization, standardization and development of Free/Libre software applications in malayalam. Currently the project has 40+ developers and 200+ nondeveloper members

This is the main development repository of Swathanthra Malayalam Computing (SMC). For more details,see http://wiki.smc.org.in

---

Read the following tutorials to start using git, like a happy person.

• http://smalltalk.gnu.org/blog/bonzinip/using-git-without-feeling-stupid-part-1
• http://smalltalk.gnu.org/blog/bonzinip/using-git-without-feeling-stupid-part-2

gayathri's Issues

Google Fonts Latin Core coverage

Taken from the FB checks performed after PR #2573 was updated pointing at Version 1.110-2.

Google Fonts expects that fonts in its collection support at least the minimal set of characters defined in the GF-Latin-core glyph-set.

This fail is related to the reported issue #15 in GitLab

🔥 FAIL: Check `Google Fonts Latin Core` glyph coverage.

• com.google.fonts/check/glyph_coverage

--- Rationale ---

Google Fonts expects that fonts in its collection support at least the minimal
set of characters defined in the `GF-latin-core` glyph-set.

• 🔥 FAIL Missing required codepoints: 0x00A1 (INVERTED EXCLAMATION MARK), 0x00A2 (CENT SIGN), 0x00A4 (CURRENCY SIGN), 0x00A6 (BROKEN BAR) and 18 more. [code: missing-codepoints]

To-Do list to Update Gayathri on GF

This would be the To-Do list for the onboarding process for Gayathri.

• Solve the remaining Fails: Google Fonts Latin Core coverage; License file name.
• Inspect the Warns and ensure the reported is ok in Gayathri. Particularly the ones about GDEF table.
• Review Outline Quality Checklist and ensure everything is ok. Some of the reported Warns are related to it.
• Review/adjust the spacing and kerning
• Include the Bio information for the Designer Catalog.

Fontbakery complete report

Fontbakery report

Fontbakery version: 0.7.34

[10] Gayathri-Bold.ttf

🔥 FAIL: Check `Google Fonts Latin Core` glyph coverage.

• com.google.fonts/check/glyph_coverage

--- Rationale ---

Google Fonts expects that fonts in its collection support at least the minimal
set of characters defined in the `GF-latin-core` glyph-set.

• 🔥 FAIL Missing required codepoints: 0x00A1 (INVERTED EXCLAMATION MARK), 0x00A2 (CENT SIGN), 0x00A4 (CURRENCY SIGN), 0x00A6 (BROKEN BAR) and 18 more. [code: missing-codepoints]

🔥 FAIL: Check copyright namerecords match license file.

• com.google.fonts/check/name/license

--- Rationale ---

A known licensing description must be provided in the NameID 14 (LICENSE
DESCRIPTION) entries of the name table.

The source of truth for this check (to determine which license is in use) is a
file placed side-by-side to your font project including the licensing terms.

Depending on the chosen license, one of the following string snippets is
expected to be found on the NameID 13 (LICENSE DESCRIPTION) entries of the name
table:
- "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1.
This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL"
- "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0"
- "Licensed under the Ubuntu Font Licence 1.0."


Currently accepted licenses are Apache or Open Font License.
For a small set of legacy families the Ubuntu Font License may be acceptable as
well.

When in doubt, please choose OFL for new font projects.

• 🔥 FAIL License file LICENSE.txt exists but NameID 13 (LICENSE DESCRIPTION) value on platform 3 (WINDOWS) is not specified for that. Value was: "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1. This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL" Must be changed to "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0" [code: wrong]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN For now we're still accepting http URLs, but you should consider using https instead.
  [code: http]

⚠ WARN: License URL matches License text on name table?

• com.google.fonts/check/name/license_url

--- Rationale ---

A known license URL must be provided in the NameID 14 (LICENSE INFO URL) entry
of the name table.

The source of truth for this check is the licensing text found on the NameID 13
entry (LICENSE DESCRIPTION).

The string snippets used for detecting licensing terms are:
- "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1.
This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL"
- "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0"
- "Licensed under the Ubuntu Font Licence 1.0."


Currently accepted licenses are Apache or Open Font License.
For a small set of legacy families the Ubuntu Font License may be acceptable as
well.

When in doubt, please choose OFL for new font projects.

• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=14] [code: http-in-license-info]
• ⚠ WARN For now we're still accepting http URLs, but you should consider using https instead.
  [code: http]

⚠ WARN: Check if each glyph has the recommended amount of contours.

• com.google.fonts/check/contour_count

--- Rationale ---

Visually QAing thousands of glyphs by hand is tiring. Most glyphs can only be
constructured in a handful of ways. This means a glyph's contour count will
only differ slightly amongst different fonts, e.g a 'g' could either be 2 or 3
contours, depending on whether its double story or single story.

However, a quotedbl should have 2 contours, unless the font belongs to a
display family.

This check currently does not cover variable fonts because there's plenty of
alternative ways of constructing glyphs with multiple outlines for each feature
in a VarFont. The expected contour count data for this check is currently
optimized for the typical construction of glyphs in static fonts.

• ⚠ WARN This check inspects the glyph outlines and detects the total number of contours in each of them. The expected values are infered from the typical ammounts of contours observed in a large collection of reference font families. The divergences listed below may simply indicate a significantly different design on some of your glyphs. On the other hand, some of these may flag actual bugs in the font such as glyphs mapped to an incorrect codepoint. Please consider reviewing the design and codepoint assignment of these to make sure they are correct.

The following glyphs do not have the recommended number of contours:

Glyph name: uni00AD Contours detected: 0 Expected: 1
Glyph name: ZWNJ Contours detected: 1 Expected: 0
Glyph name: ZWJ Contours detected: 2 Expected: 0
Glyph name: uni25CC Contours detected: 8 Expected: 16 or 12
Glyph name: rupee Contours detected: 1 Expected: 3
Glyph name: uni00AD Contours detected: 0 Expected: 1
Glyph name: uni25CC Contours detected: 8 Expected: 16 or 12 [code: contour-count]

⚠ WARN: Check mark characters are in GDEF mark glyph class)

• com.google.fonts/check/gdef_spacing_marks

--- Rationale ---

Glyphs in the GDEF mark glyph class should be non-spacing.
Spacing glyphs in the GDEF mark glyph class may have incorrect anchor
positioning that was only intended for building composite glyphs during design.

• ⚠ WARN The following spacing glyphs may be in the GDEF mark glyph class by mistake:
  dotreph and xx [code: spacing-mark-glyphs]

⚠ WARN: Check mark characters are in GDEF mark glyph class

• com.google.fonts/check/gdef_mark_chars

--- Rationale ---

Mark characters should be in the GDEF mark glyph class.

• ⚠ WARN The following mark characters could be in the GDEF mark glyph class:
  U+0D00, U+0D01, U+0D02, U+0D03, U+0D3B, U+0D3C, U+0D3E, U+0D3F, U+0D40, U+0D41, U+0D42, U+0D43, U+0D44, U+0D46, U+0D47, U+0D48, U+0D4A, U+0D4B, U+0D4C, U+0D57, U+0D62 and U+0D63 [code: mark-chars]

⚠ WARN: Check GDEF mark glyph class doesn't have characters that are not marks)

• com.google.fonts/check/gdef_non_mark_chars

--- Rationale ---

Glyphs in the GDEF mark glyph class become non-spacing and may be repositioned
if they have mark anchors.
Only combining mark glyphs should be in that class. Any non-mark glyph must not
be in that class, in particular spacing glyphs.

• ⚠ WARN The following non-mark characters should not be in the GDEF mark glyph class:
  U+0D4E [code: non-mark-chars]

⚠ WARN: Do any segments have colinear vectors?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_colinear_vectors](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_colinear_vectors)

--- Rationale ---

This test looks for consecutive line segments which have the same angle. This
normally happens if an outline point has been added by accident.

This test is not run for variable fonts, as they may legitimately have colinear
vectors.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have colinear vectors:
  • ampersand: L<<665.0,732.0>--<787.0,587.0>> -> L<<787.0,587.0>--<913.0,439.0>> [code: found-colinear-vectors]

⚠ WARN: Do outlines contain any jaggy segments?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_jaggy_segments](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_jaggy_segments)

--- Rationale ---

This test heuristically detects outline segments which form a particularly
small angle, indicative of an outline error. This may cause false positives in
cases such as extreme ink traps, so should be regarded as advisory and backed
up by manual inspection.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have jaggy segments:
  • k1k1u2: B<<2082.0,382.0>-<2049.0,410.0>-<2005.0,410.0>>/B<<2005.0,410.0>-<2017.0,409.0>-<1970.0,409.0>> = 4.763641690726144
  • k1u1: B<<1526.0,333.0>-<1585.0,333.0>-<1576.0,332.0>>/B<<1576.0,332.0>-<1601.0,334.0>-<1613.0,346.0>> = 1.766270486008855 and ngk1u1: B<<1526.0,333.0>-<1585.0,333.0>-<1576.0,332.0>>/B<<1576.0,332.0>-<1601.0,334.0>-<1613.0,346.0>> = 1.766270486008855 [code: found-jaggy-segments]

⚠ WARN: Do outlines contain any semi-vertical or semi-horizontal lines?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical)

--- Rationale ---

This test detects line segments which are nearly, but not quite, exactly
horizontal or vertical. Sometimes such lines are created by design, but often
they are indicative of a design error.

This test is disabled for italic styles, which often contain nearly-upright
lines.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have semi-vertical/semi-horizontal lines:
  • ch1ch1: L<<1334.0,112.0>--<1335.0,944.0>>
  • ch1ch1: L<<1335.0,-308.0>--<1334.0,0.0>>
  • ch1ch1u1: L<<1334.0,112.0>--<1335.0,944.0>>
  • ch1ch1u1: L<<1335.0,-308.0>--<1334.0,0.0>>
  • ch1ch1u2: L<<1334.0,112.0>--<1335.0,944.0>>
  • ch1ch1u2: L<<1335.0,-308.0>--<1334.0,0.0>>
  • endash: L<<100.0,404.0>--<101.0,524.0>>
  • endash: L<<892.0,524.0>--<891.0,404.0>>
  • g: L<<1072.0,945.0>--<1071.0,40.0>>
  • gcircumflex: L<<1072.0,945.0>--<1071.0,40.0>> and 106 more. [code: found-semi-vertical]

[8] Gayathri-Regular.ttf

🔥 FAIL: Check `Google Fonts Latin Core` glyph coverage.

• com.google.fonts/check/glyph_coverage

--- Rationale ---

Google Fonts expects that fonts in its collection support at least the minimal
set of characters defined in the `GF-latin-core` glyph-set.

• 🔥 FAIL Missing required codepoints: 0x00A1 (INVERTED EXCLAMATION MARK), 0x00A2 (CENT SIGN), 0x00A4 (CURRENCY SIGN), 0x00A6 (BROKEN BAR) and 18 more. [code: missing-codepoints]

🔥 FAIL: Check copyright namerecords match license file.

• com.google.fonts/check/name/license

--- Rationale ---

A known licensing description must be provided in the NameID 14 (LICENSE
DESCRIPTION) entries of the name table.

The source of truth for this check (to determine which license is in use) is a
file placed side-by-side to your font project including the licensing terms.

Depending on the chosen license, one of the following string snippets is
expected to be found on the NameID 13 (LICENSE DESCRIPTION) entries of the name
table:
- "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1.
This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL"
- "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0"
- "Licensed under the Ubuntu Font Licence 1.0."


Currently accepted licenses are Apache or Open Font License.
For a small set of legacy families the Ubuntu Font License may be acceptable as
well.

When in doubt, please choose OFL for new font projects.

• 🔥 FAIL License file LICENSE.txt exists but NameID 13 (LICENSE DESCRIPTION) value on platform 3 (WINDOWS) is not specified for that. Value was: "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1. This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL" Must be changed to "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0" [code: wrong]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN For now we're still accepting http URLs, but you should consider using https instead.
  [code: http]

⚠ WARN: License URL matches License text on name table?

• com.google.fonts/check/name/license_url

--- Rationale ---

A known license URL must be provided in the NameID 14 (LICENSE INFO URL) entry
of the name table.

The source of truth for this check is the licensing text found on the NameID 13
entry (LICENSE DESCRIPTION).

The string snippets used for detecting licensing terms are:
- "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1.
This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL"
- "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0"
- "Licensed under the Ubuntu Font Licence 1.0."


Currently accepted licenses are Apache or Open Font License.
For a small set of legacy families the Ubuntu Font License may be acceptable as
well.

When in doubt, please choose OFL for new font projects.

• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=14] [code: http-in-license-info]
• ⚠ WARN For now we're still accepting http URLs, but you should consider using https instead.
  [code: http]

⚠ WARN: Check if each glyph has the recommended amount of contours.

• com.google.fonts/check/contour_count

--- Rationale ---

Visually QAing thousands of glyphs by hand is tiring. Most glyphs can only be
constructured in a handful of ways. This means a glyph's contour count will
only differ slightly amongst different fonts, e.g a 'g' could either be 2 or 3
contours, depending on whether its double story or single story.

However, a quotedbl should have 2 contours, unless the font belongs to a
display family.

This check currently does not cover variable fonts because there's plenty of
alternative ways of constructing glyphs with multiple outlines for each feature
in a VarFont. The expected contour count data for this check is currently
optimized for the typical construction of glyphs in static fonts.

• ⚠ WARN This check inspects the glyph outlines and detects the total number of contours in each of them. The expected values are infered from the typical ammounts of contours observed in a large collection of reference font families. The divergences listed below may simply indicate a significantly different design on some of your glyphs. On the other hand, some of these may flag actual bugs in the font such as glyphs mapped to an incorrect codepoint. Please consider reviewing the design and codepoint assignment of these to make sure they are correct.

The following glyphs do not have the recommended number of contours:

Glyph name: uni00AD Contours detected: 0 Expected: 1
Glyph name: ZWNJ Contours detected: 1 Expected: 0
Glyph name: ZWJ Contours detected: 2 Expected: 0
Glyph name: uni25CC Contours detected: 8 Expected: 16 or 12
Glyph name: rupee Contours detected: 1 Expected: 3
Glyph name: uni00AD Contours detected: 0 Expected: 1
Glyph name: uni25CC Contours detected: 8 Expected: 16 or 12 [code: contour-count]

⚠ WARN: Check mark characters are in GDEF mark glyph class)

• com.google.fonts/check/gdef_spacing_marks

--- Rationale ---

Glyphs in the GDEF mark glyph class should be non-spacing.
Spacing glyphs in the GDEF mark glyph class may have incorrect anchor
positioning that was only intended for building composite glyphs during design.

• ⚠ WARN The following spacing glyphs may be in the GDEF mark glyph class by mistake:
  dotreph and xx [code: spacing-mark-glyphs]

⚠ WARN: Check mark characters are in GDEF mark glyph class

• com.google.fonts/check/gdef_mark_chars

--- Rationale ---

Mark characters should be in the GDEF mark glyph class.

• ⚠ WARN The following mark characters could be in the GDEF mark glyph class:
  U+0D00, U+0D01, U+0D02, U+0D03, U+0D3B, U+0D3C, U+0D3E, U+0D3F, U+0D40, U+0D41, U+0D42, U+0D43, U+0D44, U+0D46, U+0D47, U+0D48, U+0D4A, U+0D4B, U+0D4C, U+0D57, U+0D62 and U+0D63 [code: mark-chars]

⚠ WARN: Check GDEF mark glyph class doesn't have characters that are not marks)

• com.google.fonts/check/gdef_non_mark_chars

--- Rationale ---

Glyphs in the GDEF mark glyph class become non-spacing and may be repositioned
if they have mark anchors.
Only combining mark glyphs should be in that class. Any non-mark glyph must not
be in that class, in particular spacing glyphs.

• ⚠ WARN The following non-mark characters should not be in the GDEF mark glyph class:
  U+0D4E [code: non-mark-chars]

⚠ WARN: Do outlines contain any semi-vertical or semi-horizontal lines?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical)

--- Rationale ---

This test detects line segments which are nearly, but not quite, exactly
horizontal or vertical. Sometimes such lines are created by design, but often
they are indicative of a design error.

This test is disabled for italic styles, which often contain nearly-upright
lines.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have semi-vertical/semi-horizontal lines:
  • _k2: L<<815.0,-562.0>--<814.0,-66.0>>
  • _k2: L<<937.0,-66.0>--<938.0,-592.0>>
  • endash: L<<100.0,404.0>--<101.0,524.0>>
  • endash: L<<892.0,524.0>--<891.0,404.0>>
  • h1m1r1: L<<1790.0,0.0>--<1791.0,165.0>>
  • k1shr1: L<<2636.0,0.0>--<2637.0,165.0>>
  • k2r1: L<<1438.0,2.0>--<1439.0,167.0>>
  • k4r1: L<<2073.0,-1.0>--<2074.0,164.0>>
  • k4r2: L<<2073.0,0.0>--<2074.0,165.0>>
  • lh: L<<835.0,-42.0>--<377.0,-41.0>> and 61 more. [code: found-semi-vertical]

[10] Gayathri-Thin.ttf

🔥 FAIL: Check `Google Fonts Latin Core` glyph coverage.

• com.google.fonts/check/glyph_coverage

--- Rationale ---

Google Fonts expects that fonts in its collection support at least the minimal
set of characters defined in the `GF-latin-core` glyph-set.

• 🔥 FAIL Missing required codepoints: 0x00A1 (INVERTED EXCLAMATION MARK), 0x00A2 (CENT SIGN), 0x00A4 (CURRENCY SIGN), 0x00A6 (BROKEN BAR) and 18 more. [code: missing-codepoints]

🔥 FAIL: Check copyright namerecords match license file.

• com.google.fonts/check/name/license

--- Rationale ---

A known licensing description must be provided in the NameID 14 (LICENSE
DESCRIPTION) entries of the name table.

The source of truth for this check (to determine which license is in use) is a
file placed side-by-side to your font project including the licensing terms.

Depending on the chosen license, one of the following string snippets is
expected to be found on the NameID 13 (LICENSE DESCRIPTION) entries of the name
table:
- "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1.
This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL"
- "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0"
- "Licensed under the Ubuntu Font Licence 1.0."


Currently accepted licenses are Apache or Open Font License.
For a small set of legacy families the Ubuntu Font License may be acceptable as
well.

When in doubt, please choose OFL for new font projects.

• 🔥 FAIL License file LICENSE.txt exists but NameID 13 (LICENSE DESCRIPTION) value on platform 3 (WINDOWS) is not specified for that. Value was: "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1. This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL" Must be changed to "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0" [code: wrong]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN For now we're still accepting http URLs, but you should consider using https instead.
  [code: http]

⚠ WARN: License URL matches License text on name table?

• com.google.fonts/check/name/license_url

--- Rationale ---

A known license URL must be provided in the NameID 14 (LICENSE INFO URL) entry
of the name table.

The source of truth for this check is the licensing text found on the NameID 13
entry (LICENSE DESCRIPTION).

The string snippets used for detecting licensing terms are:
- "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1.
This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL"
- "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0"
- "Licensed under the Ubuntu Font Licence 1.0."


Currently accepted licenses are Apache or Open Font License.
For a small set of legacy families the Ubuntu Font License may be acceptable as
well.

When in doubt, please choose OFL for new font projects.

• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=14] [code: http-in-license-info]
• ⚠ WARN For now we're still accepting http URLs, but you should consider using https instead.
  [code: http]

⚠ WARN: Check if each glyph has the recommended amount of contours.

• com.google.fonts/check/contour_count

--- Rationale ---

Visually QAing thousands of glyphs by hand is tiring. Most glyphs can only be
constructured in a handful of ways. This means a glyph's contour count will
only differ slightly amongst different fonts, e.g a 'g' could either be 2 or 3
contours, depending on whether its double story or single story.

However, a quotedbl should have 2 contours, unless the font belongs to a
display family.

This check currently does not cover variable fonts because there's plenty of
alternative ways of constructing glyphs with multiple outlines for each feature
in a VarFont. The expected contour count data for this check is currently
optimized for the typical construction of glyphs in static fonts.

• ⚠ WARN This check inspects the glyph outlines and detects the total number of contours in each of them. The expected values are infered from the typical ammounts of contours observed in a large collection of reference font families. The divergences listed below may simply indicate a significantly different design on some of your glyphs. On the other hand, some of these may flag actual bugs in the font such as glyphs mapped to an incorrect codepoint. Please consider reviewing the design and codepoint assignment of these to make sure they are correct.

The following glyphs do not have the recommended number of contours:

Glyph name: uni00AD Contours detected: 0 Expected: 1
Glyph name: ZWNJ Contours detected: 1 Expected: 0
Glyph name: ZWJ Contours detected: 2 Expected: 0
Glyph name: uni25CC Contours detected: 8 Expected: 16 or 12
Glyph name: rupee Contours detected: 1 Expected: 3
Glyph name: uni00AD Contours detected: 0 Expected: 1
Glyph name: uni25CC Contours detected: 8 Expected: 16 or 12 [code: contour-count]

⚠ WARN: Check mark characters are in GDEF mark glyph class)

• com.google.fonts/check/gdef_spacing_marks

--- Rationale ---

Glyphs in the GDEF mark glyph class should be non-spacing.
Spacing glyphs in the GDEF mark glyph class may have incorrect anchor
positioning that was only intended for building composite glyphs during design.

• ⚠ WARN The following spacing glyphs may be in the GDEF mark glyph class by mistake:
  dotreph and xx [code: spacing-mark-glyphs]

⚠ WARN: Check mark characters are in GDEF mark glyph class

• com.google.fonts/check/gdef_mark_chars

--- Rationale ---

Mark characters should be in the GDEF mark glyph class.

• ⚠ WARN The following mark characters could be in the GDEF mark glyph class:
  U+0D00, U+0D01, U+0D02, U+0D03, U+0D3B, U+0D3C, U+0D3E, U+0D3F, U+0D40, U+0D41, U+0D42, U+0D43, U+0D44, U+0D46, U+0D47, U+0D48, U+0D4A, U+0D4B, U+0D4C, U+0D57, U+0D62 and U+0D63 [code: mark-chars]

⚠ WARN: Check GDEF mark glyph class doesn't have characters that are not marks)

• com.google.fonts/check/gdef_non_mark_chars

--- Rationale ---

Glyphs in the GDEF mark glyph class become non-spacing and may be repositioned
if they have mark anchors.
Only combining mark glyphs should be in that class. Any non-mark glyph must not
be in that class, in particular spacing glyphs.

• ⚠ WARN The following non-mark characters should not be in the GDEF mark glyph class:
  U+0D4E [code: non-mark-chars]

⚠ WARN: Do any segments have colinear vectors?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_colinear_vectors](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_colinear_vectors)

--- Rationale ---

This test looks for consecutive line segments which have the same angle. This
normally happens if an outline point has been added by accident.

This test is not run for variable fonts, as they may legitimately have colinear
vectors.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have colinear vectors:
  • k3th3th4: L<<1571.0,689.0>--<1571.0,688.0>> -> L<<1571.0,688.0>--<1571.0,674.0>>
  • k3th3th4u1: L<<1571.0,689.0>--<1571.0,688.0>> -> L<<1571.0,688.0>--<1571.0,674.0>>
  • k3th3th4u2: L<<1571.0,689.0>--<1571.0,688.0>> -> L<<1571.0,688.0>--<1571.0,674.0>>
  • mukkaal: L<<922.0,11.0>--<923.0,414.0>> -> L<<923.0,414.0>--<922.0,615.0>> and nhcil: L<<922.0,11.0>--<923.0,413.0>> -> L<<923.0,413.0>--<922.0,614.0>> [code: found-colinear-vectors]

⚠ WARN: Do outlines contain any jaggy segments?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_jaggy_segments](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_jaggy_segments)

--- Rationale ---

This test heuristically detects outline segments which form a particularly
small angle, indicative of an outline error. This may cause false positives in
cases such as extreme ink traps, so should be regarded as advisory and backed
up by manual inspection.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have jaggy segments:
  • _k1k1u1: B<<1121.0,-321.0>-<1163.0,-317.0>-<1152.0,-319.0>>/B<<1152.0,-319.0>-<1179.0,-315.0>-<1198.0,-297.0>> = 1.877877447285382
  • _k1u2: B<<855.0,-468.0>-<903.0,-468.0>-<896.0,-469.0>>/B<<896.0,-469.0>-<941.0,-464.0>-<941.0,-410.0>> = 1.7899106082458724
  • h1l3: B<<1035.0,-100.5>-<977.0,-87.0>-<933.0,-83.0>>/B<<933.0,-83.0>-<1048.0,-123.0>-<1048.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • h1l3u1: B<<1035.0,-100.5>-<977.0,-87.0>-<933.0,-83.0>>/B<<933.0,-83.0>-<1048.0,-123.0>-<1048.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • h1l3u2: B<<1035.0,-100.5>-<977.0,-87.0>-<933.0,-83.0>>/B<<933.0,-83.0>-<1048.0,-123.0>-<1048.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k1l3: B<<796.0,-100.5>-<738.0,-87.0>-<694.0,-83.0>>/B<<694.0,-83.0>-<809.0,-123.0>-<809.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k1l3u1: B<<796.0,-100.5>-<738.0,-87.0>-<694.0,-83.0>>/B<<694.0,-83.0>-<809.0,-123.0>-<809.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k1l3u2: B<<796.0,-100.5>-<738.0,-87.0>-<694.0,-83.0>>/B<<694.0,-83.0>-<809.0,-123.0>-<809.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k3l3: B<<666.0,-110.5>-<608.0,-97.0>-<564.0,-93.0>>/B<<564.0,-93.0>-<679.0,-133.0>-<679.0,-285.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k3l3u1: B<<666.0,-110.5>-<608.0,-97.0>-<564.0,-93.0>>/B<<564.0,-93.0>-<679.0,-133.0>-<679.0,-285.0>> = 13.984579118075901 and 36 more. [code: found-jaggy-segments]

⚠ WARN: Do outlines contain any semi-vertical or semi-horizontal lines?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical)

--- Rationale ---

This test detects line segments which are nearly, but not quite, exactly
horizontal or vertical. Sometimes such lines are created by design, but often
they are indicative of a design error.

This test is disabled for italic styles, which often contain nearly-upright
lines.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have semi-vertical/semi-horizontal lines:
  • endash: L<<100.0,404.0>--<101.0,524.0>>
  • endash: L<<892.0,524.0>--<891.0,404.0>>
  • k1th1u2: L<<1194.0,470.0>--<653.0,471.0>>
  • mukkaal: L<<922.0,11.0>--<923.0,414.0>>
  • mukkaal: L<<923.0,414.0>--<922.0,615.0>>
  • nhcil: L<<922.0,11.0>--<923.0,413.0>>
  • nhcil: L<<923.0,413.0>--<922.0,614.0>>
  • s1th2: L<<3049.0,71.0>--<3050.0,603.0>>
  • s1th2r1: L<<3049.0,71.0>--<3050.0,603.0>>
  • s1th2u1: L<<3049.0,71.0>--<3050.0,603.0>> and 60 more. [code: found-semi-vertical]

Summary

💔 ERROR	🔥 FAIL	⚠ WARN	💤 SKIP	ℹ INFO	🍞 PASS	🔎 DEBUG
0	6	22	268	22	237	0
0%	1%	4%	48%	4%	43%	0%

Note: The following loglevels were omitted in this report:

• SKIP
• INFO
• PASS
• DEBUG

Copyright name records

Taken from the FB checks performed after PR #2573 was updated pointing at Version 1.110-2.

Please ensure copyright strings match and change the URL to https

🔥 FAIL: Check copyright namerecords match license file.

• com.google.fonts/check/name/license

--- Rationale ---

A known licensing description must be provided in the NameID 14 (LICENSE
DESCRIPTION) entries of the name table.

The source of truth for this check (to determine which license is in use) is a
file placed side-by-side to your font project including the licensing terms.

Depending on the chosen license, one of the following string snippets is
expected to be found on the NameID 13 (LICENSE DESCRIPTION) entries of the name
table:
- "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1.
This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL"
- "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0"
- "Licensed under the Ubuntu Font Licence 1.0."


Currently accepted licenses are Apache or Open Font License.
For a small set of legacy families the Ubuntu Font License may be acceptable as
well.

When in doubt, please choose OFL for new font projects.

• 🔥 FAIL License file LICENSE.txt exists but NameID 13 (LICENSE DESCRIPTION) value on platform 3 (WINDOWS) is not specified for that. Value was: "This Font Software is licensed under the SIL Open Font License, Version 1.1. This license is available with a FAQ at: https://scripts.sil.org/OFL" Must be changed to "Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0" [code: wrong]
• ⚠ WARN Please consider using HTTPS URLs at name table entry [plat=3, enc=1, name=13] [code: http-in-description]
• ⚠ WARN For now we're still accepting http URLs, but you should consider using https instead.
  [code: http]

Reported WARNS

Taken from the FB checks performed after PR #2573 was updated pointing at Version 1.110-2.

Outline Quality Warns

These Warn are related to the Outline Quality Checklist, please inspect it and make sure your font is ready by fulfilling it.

⚠ WARN: Do any segments have colinear vectors?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_colinear_vectors](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_colinear_vectors)

--- Rationale ---

This test looks for consecutive line segments which have the same angle. This
normally happens if an outline point has been added by accident.

This test is not run for variable fonts, as they may legitimately have colinear
vectors.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have colinear vectors:
  • k3th3th4: L<<1571.0,689.0>--<1571.0,688.0>> -> L<<1571.0,688.0>--<1571.0,674.0>>
  • k3th3th4u1: L<<1571.0,689.0>--<1571.0,688.0>> -> L<<1571.0,688.0>--<1571.0,674.0>>
  • k3th3th4u2: L<<1571.0,689.0>--<1571.0,688.0>> -> L<<1571.0,688.0>--<1571.0,674.0>>
  • mukkaal: L<<922.0,11.0>--<923.0,414.0>> -> L<<923.0,414.0>--<922.0,615.0>> and nhcil: L<<922.0,11.0>--<923.0,413.0>> -> L<<923.0,413.0>--<922.0,614.0>> [code: found-colinear-vectors]

⚠ WARN: Do outlines contain any jaggy segments?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_jaggy_segments](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_jaggy_segments)

--- Rationale ---

This test heuristically detects outline segments which form a particularly
small angle, indicative of an outline error. This may cause false positives in
cases such as extreme ink traps, so should be regarded as advisory and backed
up by manual inspection.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have jaggy segments:
  • _k1k1u1: B<<1121.0,-321.0>-<1163.0,-317.0>-<1152.0,-319.0>>/B<<1152.0,-319.0>-<1179.0,-315.0>-<1198.0,-297.0>> = 1.877877447285382
  • _k1u2: B<<855.0,-468.0>-<903.0,-468.0>-<896.0,-469.0>>/B<<896.0,-469.0>-<941.0,-464.0>-<941.0,-410.0>> = 1.7899106082458724
  • h1l3: B<<1035.0,-100.5>-<977.0,-87.0>-<933.0,-83.0>>/B<<933.0,-83.0>-<1048.0,-123.0>-<1048.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • h1l3u1: B<<1035.0,-100.5>-<977.0,-87.0>-<933.0,-83.0>>/B<<933.0,-83.0>-<1048.0,-123.0>-<1048.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • h1l3u2: B<<1035.0,-100.5>-<977.0,-87.0>-<933.0,-83.0>>/B<<933.0,-83.0>-<1048.0,-123.0>-<1048.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k1l3: B<<796.0,-100.5>-<738.0,-87.0>-<694.0,-83.0>>/B<<694.0,-83.0>-<809.0,-123.0>-<809.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k1l3u1: B<<796.0,-100.5>-<738.0,-87.0>-<694.0,-83.0>>/B<<694.0,-83.0>-<809.0,-123.0>-<809.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k1l3u2: B<<796.0,-100.5>-<738.0,-87.0>-<694.0,-83.0>>/B<<694.0,-83.0>-<809.0,-123.0>-<809.0,-275.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k3l3: B<<666.0,-110.5>-<608.0,-97.0>-<564.0,-93.0>>/B<<564.0,-93.0>-<679.0,-133.0>-<679.0,-285.0>> = 13.984579118075901
  • k3l3u1: B<<666.0,-110.5>-<608.0,-97.0>-<564.0,-93.0>>/B<<564.0,-93.0>-<679.0,-133.0>-<679.0,-285.0>> = 13.984579118075901 and 36 more. [code: found-jaggy-segments]

⚠ WARN: Do outlines contain any semi-vertical or semi-horizontal lines?

• [com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical](https://font-bakery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/fontbakery/profiles/<Section: Outline Correctness Checks>.html#com.google.fonts/check/outline_semi_vertical)

--- Rationale ---

This test detects line segments which are nearly, but not quite, exactly
horizontal or vertical. Sometimes such lines are created by design, but often
they are indicative of a design error.

This test is disabled for italic styles, which often contain nearly-upright
lines.

• ⚠ WARN The following glyphs have semi-vertical/semi-horizontal lines:
  • endash: L<<100.0,404.0>--<101.0,524.0>>
  • endash: L<<892.0,524.0>--<891.0,404.0>>
  • k1th1u2: L<<1194.0,470.0>--<653.0,471.0>>
  • mukkaal: L<<922.0,11.0>--<923.0,414.0>>
  • mukkaal: L<<923.0,414.0>--<922.0,615.0>>
  • nhcil: L<<922.0,11.0>--<923.0,413.0>>
  • nhcil: L<<923.0,413.0>--<922.0,614.0>>
  • s1th2: L<<3049.0,71.0>--<3050.0,603.0>>
  • s1th2r1: L<<3049.0,71.0>--<3050.0,603.0>>
  • s1th2u1: L<<3049.0,71.0>--<3050.0,603.0>> and 60 more. [code: found-semi-vertical]

Outline Quality Checklist

Outline Quality Checklist

Make sure your font is ready for mastering by fulfilling this checklist. Design is not particularly judged here, we are talking from the point of view of the technical quality aspect of a font, i.e: what you see in your font editor is what will everyone see on their own screen or printed matter.

Contours

Segments

• Mixed outline type : The outlines of one font must be either PostScript (OpenType Fonts font with CFF compression / .otf) or TrueType (OpenType Fonts with TrueType compression / .ttf). Fontlab 5 allows mixed curve type within the same glyph.
• Wrong direction: For PS outlines, the outer-shape goes counter counter-clockwise, and the inner-shape (or counter-shape) goes clockwise. It is the reverse for TT outlines: outer-shape goes clockwise and counter-shape goes counter-clockwise. We usually use PS curves for design, and they are then converted to TT when exporting TTF fonts. Whatever the chosen outlines, make sure it is consistent across the entire family.
• Almost straight: If a segment is misaligned of one or two units, it may be a mistake from the designer. This small offset can cause a big misinterpretation form the rasterizer at small ppm sizes.
• Missing inflexion point: It is considered that a curve has a suspicious inflexion when it is a single segment going from convex to concave (and vice versa). We need to divide this segment by adding a node at the point where the curve is changing condition, therefore the tangent represented by the two handles crosses the curve.
• Collinear: If two line-segments are connected with the same angle (or almost the same angle), or with a slight offset, it means that the entire line could be made with one segment (two points not more).
• Short: Segments of 1 or 2 units are often used to make ink traps, but they are also sometimes unwanted and, again, can be wildly rendered on some screens.
• Open: A contour can only be considered as such if it has a closed path, otherwise, it won't be rendered at all.
• Overlaying: It disturbs rendering, interpolation and variation.
• Overlapping: The crossing of two independent contours is not such a problem in VF (although small overlaps are preferred), and generally merged during the generation of static binaries. If you want to control the result of the merging, it is better to do it yourself. If not, try to keep them in a small overlapped area. Also try not to overlap more than 2 contours in the same area (contour crossing a contour itself crossing another contour, like an asterisk, creates confusion during generation and rendering). In any case, try to avoid overlapping shapes which cross a plain shape and a closed counter-shape (typically, Oslash should be manually merged for example).
• Self-crossing: Often known as open-corners, it is very helpful while designing and recommended for nice interpolations. They will be preserved for VF fonts and merged during generation to static binaries. To better control the result, pay attention to the size of it (not too big, not too small) as well as not leaving portions of it outside the main shape like the stem, since it can cause unwanted rendering issues. If you want to control the result of the merging, do it yourself if not, the same advises as above.

On-curve points (nodes)

• Overlaying: Also called "empty segments” because they don't have a length. They are often useless and sometimes confusing for hinting and rendering — except for some rare cases of variations.
• Missing on extremes: Points at X and Y extremes of the paths are required for hinting reasons since they attach hints to the extremum of the stem. Also, by having them you could control better the curves and probably reduce the necessity of extra nodes.
• Fractional coordinates :
• Broken smooth connection: Ensure the right type of node according to the connection, smooth (between to curve segments) or sharp (between a curve and a line segment; or two line segments)

Off-curve points (handles)

• Almost straight
• Inside node

Components

• Transformed components: Transformed components ((scaled, mirrored, stretched, rotated) are not processed correctly while generating variable ttf. This could cause issues like the original component is displayed instead, or unwanted fractional coordinates, as well as the wrong direction in outlines.
• Nested components: Component referring to another component (nested) are not exported correctly to the ttf variable format. They take back the coordinates of the original glyph. E.g. Issue #2961
• Overlapping components: While generated ttf static binaries, Fontmake doesn't decompose overlapping components, which is good for Variable Fonts but can cause some issues in static TTF.

Diffenator results

Modified glyphs

These are comparison gifs for the modified glyphs reported

Thin

Regular

Bold

All

Spacing and Kerning

Please review the spacing and kerning for the Latin.

The space of the letter j needs to be fixed.

AWA, AVA, OVO, among other kerning pairs need to be fixed. Please inspect these lists of the basic kerning pairs for Latin and ensure Gayathri covers them.

Designers Catalog Information

Taken from the FB checks performed after PR #2573 was updated pointing at Version 1.110-2.

This information is intended to feed the Designers section in the Specimen page of each font in Google Fonts. Please provide us with a bio text of SMC of 100 to 250 characters length extension and a 100*100 px png image.

A good reference of the bio could be Boutros.

🔥 FAIL: METADATA.pb: Designer is listed with the correct name on the Google Fonts catalog of designers?

• com.google.fonts/check/metadata/designer_profiles

• 🔥 FAIL Designer SMC listed a Google Plus link on the catalog, but that service is not available anymore. Please update the webpage link. [code: google-plus]

• 🔥 FAIL Designer SMC still does not have an avatar image. Please provide one. [code: missing-avatar]

Nested Components

Taken from the FB checks performed after PR #2573 was updated pointing at Version 1.110-2.

Component referring to another component (nested) could lead to some Issues. Please decompose the components to avoid having them.

This Fail is related to the Outline Quality Checklist, please inspect it and make sure your font is ready by fulfilling it.

🔥 FAIL: Check glyphs do not have components which are themselves components.

• com.google.fonts/check/glyf_nested_components

--- Rationale ---
ve been bugs rendering variable fonts with nested components. Additionally,
some static fonts with nested components have been reported to have rendering
and printing issues. (See googlefonts/fontbakery#2961 and
arrowtype/recursive#412.)

• 🔥 FAIL The following glyphs have components which themselves are component glyphs:
  • quotedblleft
  • quotedblleft
  • quotedblright
  • quotedblbase
  • Iacute
  • Ograve
  • iacute
  • oacute
  • ugrave
  • uacute and 90 more. [code: found-nested-components]