Cyrillic: Ђ, Ћ, ђ, ћ look like latin "h" instead of Cyrillic Т

Confirming this too after wandering around Belgrade today. The local derived examples don't the bowl well below the x-height, and either the bar of the tee level with the x-height or fractionally above (presumably for balance).

My understanding (although the character/ligature has evolved) is that it's still a "hooked"/"bowled" tee, rather than (anything at all) to do with a Latin 'h' root.

FWIW, the same holds for the Ubuntu regular fonts.

Данило: would you be able to draw (eg. in Inkscape) a better form for how the various Тs should/could look in a more localised style (still fitting in with the Ubuntu design).

It doesn't have to be perfect, but should hopefully help with knowing how it might be best to adjust these glyphs. (Unfortunately, not everyone is based in Serbia and used to seeing these forms everyday which is where your help would be valuable!)

To illustrate, here's a quickly hacked version of the lowercase DJE (ђ) based on the one in Ubuntu Mono R21, side-by-side with the existing version. It's was hacked together in FontForge, but is by no means to be considered anything but a demonstration.

I just grabbed few books to see how this letter actually looks like in there. Top edge of horizontal line in "ђ" character is the same as height of "x" character. Same goes for lower case "ћ".

For comparison I've included 2 photographs of different fonts and letters in question:

http://www.imagebanana.com/view/x4rry7jp/IMG_20110615_142201.jpg
http://www.imagebanana.com/view/bt9qp82z/IMG_20110615_142217.jpg

As you can see characters vary a lot from font to font. As long as character doesn't stand out it's just fine by me.

Direct attachment, minus the adverts: showing sans-serif "а Пекарић-Нађ Дејан" with crossbars level with x-height and bowl well below.

Direct attachment, minus the adverts: "х времена, људи су са дивљењем посматр / бало је да прође, међутим, више од вадесе / снови те појаве исто оно што даје моћ ћи" with the top of the bowl level with the x-height for 'ћ'/'ђ'.

MeanEYE: are these definitely Serbian texts? The Be ('б') appears to be the Russian form, not the Serbian form?

I wonder if "what works" is as simple as the difference between serif, and sans-serif.

Paul, these are definitely Serbian texts. However, it's not uncommon for Serbian books to be typeset in an entirely wrong style, mostly due to ignorance and "anybody" doing it (and of course, wide availability of Western-designed fonts for Cyrillic). FWIW, I just recently hit a few PDFs published by the government using completely uncomprehensible "Russian" cursives. That doesn't make it an officially supported form, it just means that someone was lazy or ignorant when they produced it.

As for sans vs. serif, I'd say the higher crossbar can definitely "work" more easily in serif fonts.

Just had an email from Shiraaz Gabru at Dalton Maag with:

"comment on the final report 'Cyrillic: Ђ, Ћ, ђ, ћ' below and PDF attached.

  Cyrillic: Ђ, Ћ, ђ, ћ look like latin "h" instead of Cyrillic Т
  Comparing the Ubuntu font with commonly used ones, such as
  Cambria, Georgia, Foco or Verdana, one can note that the lower cases
  Cyrillic ђ and ћ are based on a regular x-height, like the Latin h or n."

PDF from Amélie Bonet at Dalton Maag with two possible design solutions (page 1, upper half):

  Ubuntu 1 (current sub-optimal representation in v0.80)
  Ubuntu 2 (lowercase cross-bar at x-height, bowl very below)
  Ubuntu 3 (lowercase cross-bar slightly above x-height, bowl still below)

Could the previous comments please review these: Are they going in the right direction? Which is more suitable/acceptable? Is the descending hook in "Ubuntu 3" acceptable?

I (unsurprisingly) prefer option 2 very much. Ubuntu 3 is also nice, and definitely in the right direction. Descending hook in it is definitely acceptable. Both options work, imho.

Personaly, I like Ubuntu 3 more than Ubuntu 2. Because I find curve ending on ђ more pretty.

I prefer Ubuntu 3 because the dash to the letter of the higher seems so much nicer.

One more vote for Ubuntu 3. It's somehow more natural to me.

+1 for Maletaski's comment, the dash should be higher, and curve is somehow nicer in Ubuntu 3 example, it's rounder.

Another +1 for ubuntu3 version. Higher dash would work much better in case of smaller font sizes.

Yaes right direction, either Ubuntu 2 and Ubuntu 3 is fine, maybe Ubuntu 3 by photo-finish

Ubuntu3 looks better to me.

Like Ubuntu3 better, and personally find it easier to read and better looking at different sizes.

Thanks all who commented, looks like option 3 is the clear winner.

Shiraaz Gabru
Dalton Maag