I like the shapes very much.
But (even if I could be accused of stealing sheep ;-) I think a non-touching spacing could have been better.

U+1F44D

Yea, verily.

Thanks for your kind words, everyone!

Riccardo: I was thinking about (and working on) a non-touching version but it fell apart and looked weak for the regular and bold range. I might extend the family with a lighter non-touching text version but that would be quite a different thing.

Paul: Gotcha! For the next I do font I should design that glyph!

haha, i just got too used to 'liking' things on facebook. there was no 'like' button here, so i improvised. U+1F61C

Well done Tim, looks great.

The touching lowercase are fine, but I think they should be more distant (even if touching) if you add a version for smaller sizes.
Personally I would not use this version under size 12 (I have looked at your PDF, I am not judging it printed, but it’s an overall feeling: forms benefit from being larger and spacing bigger if the text-intensive application is to be favored).
I like it. I think it would work very well in a lighter weight.

Herb originally had all weights from light to bold. I realised that it looks okay if the letters properly touch or not at all. If some combinations touch, others don't, some just a tiny bit, some just not, as it was the case, it looks odd. I decided to go for the properly touching option, which is the natural choice for the bolder weights, and make sure all combinations touch, not too little, not too much, or not at all. There are actually tons of kerning pairs because of this but one shouldn't brag with that. Also, I had to introduce a few contextual alternates to implement my either-or touching strategy.

At some point, I might indeed work on further weights that do not touch at all but this would probably work only in the light weights, not in between.