Clarify: The base glyph ID. This specifies which glyph we are referencing. about variable-components-spec HOT 5 CLOSED

I note that the term "base glyph" does occur in discussion of composites in the gvar table, but in that instance it is being used in the sense used by Unicode or in GPOS (i.e., not a combining mark).

from variable-components-spec.

Here, 'base glyph' is the actual glyph that is used as a component by a composite.

I understand this may be misleading as 'base glyph' wording is used with different meaning elsewhere in the OT spec.
How would you name this?

from variable-components-spec.

Yeah, we've been struggling with the terminology, and this should be improved.

I tend to use the term "base glyph" as follows:

• Composite: a glyph that is made of components
• Component: a reference to another glyph, as part of a Composite
• Base glyph: the glyph referenced by a component

But if that's ambiguous, it should be changed.

from variable-components-spec.

For purposes of this document, using "base glyph" would be fine, and I think it's helpful to distinguish between a glyph and reference to the glyph as a component. Just clarify. Perhaps before the Proposal overview section and a short Terminology section?

Another terminology difference is that the OT spec generally uses "variation space" where you have "designspace", though it treats "variation space" as a short form for "design-variation space' (see Terminology. But I don't think there's any ambiguity about what is meant, so that is fine. But if you did add a terminology section, you could point out that relationship.

from variable-components-spec.

Thanks! I think we can switch to "variation space". A terminology section is a good suggestion.

from variable-components-spec.