On the matter of the .notdef glyph.
As it happens, I often use my own design.
The basic design was first published in the following thread.
http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2002-m11/0178.html
Some readers might like to know that the guest access username and password are available on the following page.
http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/
I sometimes use a font-specific variation on the design.
Of the three designs which Microsoft illustrates in the page which Erwin mentioned, the black rectangle with the enclosed question mark does, by the including of that question mark, have features of regular font glyphs, such as line thickness and whether serifs are used: the features used in the question mark within the .notdef glyph may or may not, in practice, match the features used in the regular question mark glyph within the font.
I do not really like the design of a question mark within a black rectangle for a .notdef glyph. To me, it seems to imply that the character is not known, whereas there is, in fact, no doubt as to what is the character, the indication is that the font cannot supply a glyph for the character.
Creative shapes, like swirls or other symbols, may not be recognized by users as indicating that a glyph is missing from the font and is not being displayed at that location.
As the sentence uses the phrase “may not”, then that is true.
However, “may not” does not mean “will not”, so I continue to use my own distinctive designs for the .notdef glyph. They are mostly large and solid, though some are not solid: maybe I should make them all solid so that they stand out in a display.
If I am not using my own design for the .notdef glyph I tend to use the black rectangle. However, a few of my development fonts do have the default black rectangle with a question mark and some might have made it to the web!
When starting a new font using FontCreator one has the option to set the “Don’t include outlines”, the option being prominently offered.
As it happens, I usually choose the “Don’t include outlines” option. However, I feel that having the default case as being to “Include outlines” is the way round to do it, as that means that a beginner will get the outlines without neding to take any action.
Consider for example the Microsoft WordPad and Microsoft Paint programs.
If one starts Microsoft Word and presses a key on the keyboard, then the letter appears on the screen. WordPad is using several default situations, such as font, type size, colour: thus the beginner gets something.
If one starts Microsoft Paint and presses down the left mouse button and moves the mouse, then one gets a black line drawn on the screen. Paint is using several default situations, such as using the Pencil tool in black upon a white background: thus the beginner gets something.
Similarly, FontCreator by using default situations the beginner gets something more easily than if the default situations were not used.
If these letters are not added by the designer, they should not be published in a font.
I tend to have some agreement with this, though mention that not every font produced using FontCreator is intended for publication, some are for people learning: producing a first font where there are no printing characters can be confusing.
Especially the numerous problems related to quotation marks not showing in Microsoft Word and other text processors. With the predefined outlines, the number of support questions related to the missing quotes significantly dropped to almost zero.
That is interesting. That could perhaps mean that lots of new designers are not aware of the problem and its solution of the need to add the smart quote glyphs into fonts and thus they do not learn about that aspect of font design: or it could perhaps mean that putting the predefined outlines into the font helps them to realize what is happening and so they do not need to ask a support question in order to find out. Or maybe some combination of the two, or indeed perhaps something else.
William Overington
22 November 2007
