Strikes me we should consider adding a PaintBitmap to COLRv1. That would make it possible for us to convert many (though not all) fonts between COLRv1 <=> ot-svg. Looking at my own little slice of the world I could imagine onboarding a COLRv1 font to Google Fonts and if a Safari user happens to try to view a page using it they receive an ot-svg equivalent. The font file they get will be much bigger but it will Just Work.
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 9:48 AM Cosimo Lupo <[email protected]> wrote: > off-topic, but sbix only works reliably on mac --> > https://github.com/harfbuzz/harfbuzz/issues/2679#issuecomment-1021419864 > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 5:43 PM Adam Twardoch (Lists) < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Apologies for a bit off-topic: >> >> BTW, given that some folks at Apple don’t seem to be great fans of >> COLRv1, while Google isn’t a great fan of SVG, chances are that we’ll see >> the phasing out of "sbix" and "CBDT", but both COLRv1 and SVG will stick >> around — also because SVG allows bitmaps. Check out: >> >> - https://creativemarket.com/search?q=opentype+svg >> - https://creativemarket.com/romanjusdado/2950202-Wooden-Tiles-Font >> - >> https://creativemarket.com/SamParrett/5150302-Glory-Culture-SVG-Font-Extras >> - >> https://creativemarket.com/helloimgreg/2330313-Stranger-Times-OpenType-SVG-Font >> of su >> This stuff is all bitmap-based, it’s all released fonts available on the >> market, and for now, they’re OT+SVG only. COLRv1 won’t replace them. >> >> This means that we’ll keep seeing OT+SVG fonts, OT+COLRv1 fonts and quite >> possibly _hybrid_ OT+SVG+COLRv1 fonts, which kind of make sense if the font >> vendor wants to make the users’ life simple. >> >> I’m just saying — the hybrid OT+SVG+COLRv1 font is not an eccentricity, I >> think it’ll be reality — especially if font editor vendors like FontLab >> make creation of such hybrids easy. >> >> With 4 separate color font flavors, the market acceptance was low (but >> still, people have made many such fonts). But as soon as those flavors are >> down to just 2, I think both will stick around. (Though I do see a reason >> for sbix to also exist, especially in Apple’s own HEIC flavor, not PNG, >> which they use on iOS). >> >> Best, >> Adam >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 5:07 PM Cosimo Lupo via FreeType development < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 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 >>>> >>>
