[markFeatureWriter] Allow setting markClassPrefix using writer options#965
[markFeatureWriter] Allow setting markClassPrefix using writer options#965khaledhosny wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
Currently it is only a class attribute, but users may want to set it in fonts (e.g. glyphsLib might use `mark` prefix like Glyphs does).
ufo2ft default to `MC` prefix for mark classes, but Glyphs uses `mark`, since feature code can reference auto generated code, we want to match Glyphs here. Depends on googlefonts/ufo2ft#965
|
@khaledhosny if we unilaterally changed the default mark class prefix to "mark" like Glyphs.app uses, do you think anybody would notice/care? These are autogenerated and I don't think people would rely on those particular classes for their handwritten features, would they? |
It is a breaking change for sure (from our old behavior), but it is converging with GlyphsApp so I consider it an improvement. I have fonts that depend on fontmake’s current behavior, but fail when used in GlyphsApp, with this change they will fail in both and I’ll have to update them. It is a niche thing, though, so I don’t think many people depend on fontmake’s current behavior. |
|
i'm leaning towards just doing and see if anyone complains... in that case we may find a way to support both. Otherwise it'd be adding complication for nothing |
|
So instead of this PR, we just change the prefix? I’m OK with that as well. |
|
yeah |
Matches GlyphsApp prefix, which allows manual feature code that references auto-generated mark classes to be compiled by GlyphsApp and fontmake. See for #965 alternative approach and discussion.
2 participants
Currently it is only a class attribute, but users may want to set it in fonts (e.g. glyphsLib might use
markprefix like Glyphs does).