Hi Werner and all, please find attached a test COLRv1 + SVG font, containing only one color glyph ✍ "WRITING HAND" (U+270D) emoji. The font was built using nanoemoji <https://github.com/googlefonts/nanoemoji> using the following command, from the root of the noto-emoji <https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-emoji> repository:
$ nanoemoji --color_format=glyf_colr_1_and_picosvg --keep_glyph_names --pretty_print --family "Noto Color Emoji COLRv1 And SVG" svg/emoji_u270d.svg Let me know if that is what you are looking for. Cheers Cosimo On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 7:51 PM Werner LEMBERG <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Do you still need such a test font with SVG and COLR in it? I guess, > > we can make one if it's needed. > > This would be still very helpful, yes. I think it would be helpful > for for fuzzing, too. A single glyph (besides '.notdef) would be > enough. > > >> The question doesn't arise for serious `COLR` handling, as > >> described above. In case of the convenience `COLR` rendering, > >> `SVG` takes precendence. > > > > I think the table preference decision should be made by the > > application, or in the FT_LoadGlyph then with flags that allow > > separate selection? > > Since the convenience stuff is tagged as experimental, and Alexei has > some serious concerns I probably won't change anything right now. > > > FWIW, overall, I think if a font has COLRv1 and SVG, COLRv1 should > > have preference as it enables variable capabilities. > > This is up to the application; there is no issue w.r.t. precendence at > all. > > > Werner >
<<attachment: NotoColorEmojiCOLRv1AndSVG-WritingHand.zip>>
