Re: A .notdef glyph

From: John Hudson (
Date: Thu Nov 07 2002 - 15:32:25 EST

  • Next message: John Cowan: "Re: A .notdef glyph"

    At 14:25 11/7/2002, John Cowan wrote:

    >Excellent! The only thing I would suggest would be to move the white
    >dot down a little.

    The dot's vertical position is tricky. If I centre it geometrically on the
    height of the black rectangle, it looks too low because of the increased
    black area above caused by the connection of the rectangle to the stem of
    the hook. So I've raised it slightly. If you concentrate on the dot, it
    looks too high, but if you stand back and look at the whole glyph, it looks
    about right, or even a touch too low.

    John Hudson

    Tiro Typeworks
    Vancouver, BC

    It is necessary that by all means and cunning,
    the cursed owners of books should be persuaded
    to make them available to us, either by argument
    or by force. - Michael Apostolis, 1467

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 07 2002 - 17:23:24 EST