[OpenType] RE: Proposal: deprecate ReqFeatureIndex

John Hudson john at tiro.ca
Wed Aug 22 19:56:16 CEST 2012

On 22/08/12 5:07 AM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:

>> And I agree with you that the ReqFeatureIndex is just daffy.

> IMO you are contradicting yourself, as ReqFeatureIndex does *exactly* what you
> are asking for.  Ie, a feature that can't be turned off!

No, it does not do what I want. What I want is a feature for contextual 
variants that should not be turned off, entirely akin to the <rlig> 
feature vs the other ligature features. The ReqFeatureIndex provides for 
a single developer-selected layout feature to be identified as required. 
That doesn't seem to me useful in the context of what I want to do. To 
what existing layout feature should I apply ReqFeatureIndex? I can't 
apply it to <calt> because I have lookups in that feature that are 
discretionary and can be safely turned off. And what if I have a font 
with required contextual alternates and also some other feature that I'd 
like to be required?

Like it or not, I think we're in a place where the only reliable means 
to affect required layout is to register required features. This could 
have been otherwise -- I would have favoured a required flag at the 
lookup level --, but the ReqFeatureIndex seems to me a bizarre, 
half-baked idea and I'm not surprised it isn't universally implemented.

Where Sairus and I disagree is over how strong the wording of required 
feature descriptions should be. I'd like it to be explicit that these 
features should not be turned off, but I can live with the wording of 
e.g. <rlig> as a model given the implementations of that approach.



Tiro Typeworks        www.tiro.com
Gulf Islands, BC      tiro at tiro.com

The criminologist's definition of 'public order
crimes' comes perilously close to the historian's
description of 'working-class leisure-time activity.'
  - Sidney Harring, _Policing a Class Society_

More information about the mpeg-otspec mailing list