<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [mpeg-OTspec] Toward a Composite Font format specification</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'><BR>
Thomas,<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for chiming in. To clarify, do you mean to advocate scaling horizontally within the same design space when you mention faux small caps? (Meaning, without increasing the glyph advance width, escapement, and kerning values?)<BR>
<BR>
Regards,<BR>
<BR>
— daan Strebe<BR>
Senior Computer Scientist<BR>
Adobe Systems Incorporated<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 09/08/25 21:51, "Thomas Phinney" <<a href="tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu">tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu</a>> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'> <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'd advocate keeping the three different scaling factors (overall, X<BR>
and Y). I can honestly imagine plenty of use cases for them, both in<BR>
traditional and non-traditional cases.<BR>
<BR>
One use for asymmetric X/Y scaling is in manufacturing small caps. One<BR>
could use a composite font mechanism to build faux small caps,<BR>
possibly scaled slightly so as to be slightly wider than strictly<BR>
proportional scaling. Ditto for creating numeric (or alphabetic)<BR>
inferiors or superiors. Using the composite font mechanism would allow<BR>
for taking the base glyphs from a heavier weight of the "same"<BR>
typeface....<BR>
<BR>
cheers,<BR>
<BR>
T<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR="#FFFFFF"><BR>
</FONT><BR>
</FONT></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>