Re: [apps-discuss] font/*

["Martin J. Dürst" <[e-mail]>]

I think it may be too early to discuss procedural points, but we are 
speaking about one, potentially two, drafts, both of which quite short. 
In the old days, AD-sponsored individual submission(s) would have been 
best. Now, we might need to move it through the Apps WG.

Trying to do anything like a BOF or a WG seems complete overkill. There 
are many people involved in fonts (in particular Web fonts). But I can't 
imagine them shell out the money just to come to an IETF meeting for 
getting a few types registered.

This is not about a spec for a new protocol or format. The formats 
exist, some of them for more than 10 years, some of them more recent. 
It's just about giving them labels.

Regards,    Martin.

On 2011/11/10 11:30, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>
>
> On 11/10/2011 5:00 AM, Eric Burger wrote:
>> Sounds like a call for a BOF.
>
>
> For a topic like this, I believe a BOF makes sense only for either or
> both of:
>
> 1. Interactive tutorial, to create a community of folk who share a
> common set of information and are going to proceed doing some work on
> the topic. Hence, this would prime the work pump.
>
> 2. Debate particulars, prior to formulating a spec. One can argue that
> that sounds like a regular working group, but I've tailored the
> description to fit a before-wg phase. In any event, this presumes that
> folks are already sharing a common base of knowledge and details and
> merely need to debates some details.
>
> My sense of this extended thread is that the group ain't quite far
> enough along for #2. I can't tell whether #1 is needed.
>
> d/