On Thursday, 5 March 2026 03:01:30 GMT onf wrote:
> Anyway, it seems that the font still includes glyph names except they
> are part of the CFF table. Unfortunately the OTF spec doesn't seem to
> describe the structure of the CFF table (only CFF2) and I don't want
> to spend too much time on this, but I inserted some printf debugging
> into the relevant parts of neatmkfn and while some of the character
> names are predefined by the standard, neatmkfn is clearly getting some
> names from the font itself. For instance there is not a single "onum"
> string in neatmkfn's source code, yet it's generating glyph names with
> ".onum" suffix. The debugging output is attached.
>
> Cheers,
> onf
Hi onf,
My version (.otf) uses a CFF iable to hold the glyph information, your version
(.ttf) uses a glyf table.
CFF includes the glyph name as part of the glyph definition, so:-
otfinfo -T CFF /usr/share/fonts/OTF/adobe-source-code-pro/SourceCodePro-
Regular.otf | cfftot1 | t1disasm | less
Yields:-
[...]
/zero.onum {
0 600 hsbw
-12 66 hstem
230 133 hstem
519 67 hstem
71 77 vstem
238 124 vstem
452 77 vstem
300 -12 rmoveto
142 87 109 193 hvcurveto
191 -87 105 -142 vhcurveto
-142 -87 -105 -191 hvcurveto
-193 87 -109 142 vhcurveto
closepath
66 vmoveto
-89 -63 74 162 hvcurveto
158 63 71 89 vhcurveto
89 63 -71 -158 hvcurveto
-162 -63 -74 -89 vhcurveto
closepath
176 vmoveto
33 29 25 42 hvcurveto
41 -29 25 -33 vhcurveto
-33 -29 -25 -41 hvcurveto
-42 29 -25 33 vhcurveto
closepath
endchar
} |-
So it does not need a post table to assign the glyph names.
Cheers
Deri
