[scribus] OpenType alternate glyph support

[JLuc]

Le 29/08/2015 22:45, Alex Zepeda a écrit :
> Regarding issue #1413
> <http://bugs.scribus.net/view.php?id=1413>

I added some links that illustrate state of work around opentypes
in FOSS world :

- http://ilovetypography.com/2014/10/25/why-a-better-opentype-user-interface-matters/ [^] why a better opentype UI matters
- http://blog.mmiworks.net/2015/06/designing-opentype-intro.html [^] UI expert POV
- https://github.com/opensource-opentype/features [^] features

AFAI understand it, much is to be done
and harfbuzz will be the entry workplace.

 > It looks like there was talk of a 1,000 GBP bounty, but it doesn't seem as if anything actually materialized.  I'd love
 > to throw some cash at this feature, but before going down that road I was wondering:
 > - Are there any Scribus developers who would be interested in working on this feature?  If so, have they set a price
 > they'd like to see?

This dev is priceless.
Scribus devs are all quite busy
and it seems no available money can buy their time.

2 months ago, avox launched a scribusCTL branch (for Complex Text Layout)
but that has not been active recently.
IMO this is meant to integrate harfbuzz and would enable scribus
to use future harfbuzz opentype features.

 > - What's the status of the existing private branch that was discussed ~5 years ago?
The OIF branch disappeared.

Branches come, go and vanish.
Some get some features merged.
Let's hope the ScribusCTL branch grows
and produces nice flowers of merged features.

You might find some other answers to your other questions
in the links i provided atop of this mail.

JL


> I'm curious to see what the status of this is.  I migrated to InDesign from Scribus because I use a couple of fonts (FF
> Zwo and Mister K) that make heavy use of alternate glyphs and ligatures respectively.
>
> I'd love to move back to Scribus, but specifically with Zwo I use alternate glyphs for the following characters: 2, 3,
> 4, @, a, g, u.  So entering them in manually would be quite a chore beyond a few words.
>
> - Has a list of requirements and acceptance criteria been compiled?  Has the time required to implement this been
> estimated yet?  It looks like two interrelated, but separate, features were being discussed (ligatures and alternate
> glyphs).
>
> - What's the status of the existing private branch that was discussed ~5 years ago?
>
> Cheers!
>