Add alternatives КкЖж like in a Source Sans 3

[RazerGuy]

But it would be better if they replaced the main ones, since they are more correct for cyrillic

[pauldhunt]

@RazerGuy The assertion that there are ❛correct❜ letter forms strikes me as very strange. I can concede that these forms are ❛more generally acceptable❜, but the current default forms were an intentional stylistic choice—much like any of the other small choices in typeface design. I will likely add these variants in the future, but not as the default versions.

[RazerGuy]

The assertion that there are ❛correct❜ letter forms strikes me as very strange.

In this case, it is considered an obsolete form of the letter. Cyrillic developed over a very long period of time, and therefore non-native speakers may be confused.

[pauldhunt]

@RazerGuy do you mind sharing your qualifications on making such statements, or can you point to some sources that validate your views here? thanks.

[RazerGuy]

@RazerGuy do you mind sharing your qualifications on making such statements, or can you point to some sources that validate your views here? thanks.

https://type.today/en/journal/humanist#source
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42HvtjnKRiA
https://info.paratype.com/cyrillics_101/

Finding something about the shapes of Cyrillic letters and how they developed to understand at what stage it is now is very difficult, in English I am not at all sure if there is anything intelligible and if so, how to find it. I can't even say that Cyrillic is 100% already formed, there are still questions about it.

The best way is to consult with native Cyrillic speakers like Ilya Ruderman, who worked on Roboto Flexl (if we are talking about fonts that are in Google Fonts)

[pauldhunt]

@RazerGuy Thanks for sharing this information. I will definitely give these a good read. The review of Source Sans’ Cyrillic is particularly helpful. I did consult with Maxim Zhukov on the Cyrillic design and he did share the concerns on the characters in question. However, it is always difficult (even when designing Latin fonts) trying to determine what feedback is legitimate and what is personal preference. Your comments and the sources you link to will give me more information to reconsider my design decisions. I will seriously consider your proposal here. Thanks for taking time to help educate me.

[RazerGuy]

@RazerGuy Thanks for sharing this information. I will definitely give these a good read. The review of Source Sans’ Cyrillic is particularly helpful. I did consult with Maxim Zhukov on the Cyrillic design and he did share the concerns on the characters in question. However, it is always difficult (even when designing Latin fonts) trying to determine what feedback is legitimate and what is personal preference. Your comments and the sources you link to will give me more information to reconsider my design decisions. I will seriously consider your proposal here. Thanks for taking time to help educate me.

That's great to hear, it would be great if a few Cyrillic-competent type designers would express their points of view and show their variants of letters so that you can choose what you think best suits the font. There is also a book about Cyrillic letters "Книга про буквы от Аа до Яя — Юрий Гордон", but I'm not sure how you can get it and I'm not sure if there is an English translation.

[pauldhunt]

I have a copy of this book. I’ll look over the sections that touch on the letters criticized in the type.today article.