Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The Unicode representative charts for Tangut is based on a sans-serif style, which is the traditional form (as seen in 'Tangut Yinchuan' font used to build these standard charts, which are accurate for the basic normative properties and the representative glyphs).

"Noto Tangut Serif" however is apparently based on the "Plangothic P2" font glyphs (built with a MacOS tool and not by a Tangutolist or contacts with them?), which uses a Chinese "Mincho" style, with the slightly slanted lines "regularized" to horizontals with serifs that obscure many glyphs, making them less readable, given that the Tangut ideographs (and components used at top or left as their base radicals) has a higher density of strokes than Han ideographs.

Describe the solution you'd like
We should have a separate "Noto Sans Tangut" font, more representative of the script. The serifs used in "Noto Serif Tangut" need to be reduced, even if they preserve their horizontal lines and sharper angles (which may however be more familiar to Chinese readers).

Describe alternatives you've considered
However it is still not complete for Unicode 17.0 (this is the same for "Noto Serif Tangut" font, which have numerous geometric issues (including many "jaggy" lines), and don't have correct metrics, and still no suitable metadata for the "txb" language code to indicate its coverage.

For now the Tangut script is not usable for reading with Noto fonts, especially on display.

Glyphwiki still does not index the sans-serif glyphs, and is now complete for Unicode 17.0 with a Serif/Mincho Han style. Some work is occuring there with sans-serif glyphs partially defined in user "private" set.

For now the "Tangut Yinchuan" font is better, than "Noto Serif Tangut" and "Plangothic P2" (whose goal was not to match Tangut tradition, but to offer a coverage of the Unicode SMP with a coherent style for modern Chinese/Japanese/Korean use, but Tangutologists prefer the sans-serif style, which is easier to decipher (note that the Tangut script encoding is still not complete, and notably the strokes counts indicated in the standard are not stabilized, and multiple characters were rebased on newer components in Unicode 17.0.

Work is still ongoing on their ideographic description and composition, with also ongoing work to exhibit their semantic differences, with various confusable characters that were disunified in Unicode 17.0, but not completely updated in the current standard. This work is managed by the Script Encoding Workgoup, SEW, a small liaison member for both Unicode and the ISO WG2, not by the Ideographic Rapporter Group, IRG.

Unfortunately experts at SEW about the Tangut script are very few and have long delays and dificulties to track the needed changes in time; it's even possible that the many issues added in Unicode 17.0 with incoherent changes that occured in the middle of the alpha and beta review, won't be fixed for Unicode 18.0 starting in February 2026; for now the UTC and the WG2 are both waiting for a comprehensive review of the changes needed to fix the Tangut script support in Unicode 17.0, the SEW welcomes external help to make this review in comprehensive documents that can be decided).

Font developers for Noto should review carefully the script, notably everything that changed between Unicode 16.0 and Unicode 17.0, and errors that occured in the few (complex) documents that were submitted in 2025 to the UTC and WG2. The WG2 accepted additions, but the UTC did not fullly complete the task before Unicode 17.0 release (so the non-normative character properties are not stable). The methods that are used by the IRG for the Han script should be used by the SEW, notably to improve the unification process (and avoid duplicates or erroneously encoded characters that have been accepted in the standard with insufficient review). The UTC has received bug reports, but many serious Tangutologists are not enough technical-savvy: we must help them to build more comprehensive reports, explaining the issues, and avoiding producing complex documents that are very hard to review and decide on.