Re: [apps-discuss] 答复: font/*

[Tony Hansen <[e-mail]>]

application/fontformat-truetype perhaps, but certainly not
application/fontformat-arial.The first is a media format, whereas the
latter mixes in a non-concrete look and feel.

Tony Hansen

On 11/13/2011 7:02 AM, TianLinyi wrote:
> why not define something like this:
> application/fontformat-arial
>
> define a top level type may not be needed
>
> _______________________________________
> 发件人: [e-mail] [[e-mail]] 代表 Tony Hansen [[e-mail]]
> 发送时间: 2011年11月13日 8:57
> 到: [e-mail]
> 主题: Re: [apps-discuss] font/*
>
> On 11/12/2011 6:27 AM, t.petch wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Martin J. Dürst"<[e-mail]>
>> To: "t.petch"<[e-mail]>
>> Cc:<[e-mail]>;<[e-mail]>
>> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 11:47 AM
>>
>>
>>> On 2011/11/10 18:06, t.petch wrote:
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>> My bibles say
>>>>
>>>> Type(face) Family; Courier, Futura, Century Schoolbook,  ..
>>>> Typeface; one of the above with a defined
>>>>    - Style: Roman, Italic
>>>>    - Weight: Light, Semibold, Bold, ...
>>>>    - Width: Ultracondensed, Condensed, Expanded, ...
>>>> Type Font; one of the above with a defined Size
>>>>    - eg 12-point
>>> As I said before in a mail to Dave, the last point worked well for lead
>>> type or bitmap fonts, but technology has moved beyond.
>> Martin
>>
>> The concepts have not changed and remain useful, IMO, in any discussion
>> on presentation.  What has changed is the implementation detail so when
>> I download a new package to my PC, then it will apply to all Fonts, within
>> a Typeface, as opposed to having a separate module for each Font.
>> (Incidentally, my bibles all relate to laser printing ie to modern technology
>> and have nothing to do with lead:-).
>>
>> But more significantly, as other posts have clarified for me, this thread
>> is nothing to do with fonts but with type definition languages, so perhaps
>> it should be 'type/*'.
> I've seen several hints of wanting to do web Accept-style queries along
> the line of
>
>      Accept: font/arial, font/comicsans
>
> What is it that is really desired?
>
> While this sounds like it might be a nice capability, it really doesn't
> agree with what media types are all about. The Arial font can be
> described in many different font file formats.
>
> Media types are more for describing things like:
>      MMMM/datafork-truetype
>      MMMM/intellifont
>      MMMM/postscriptfont
>      MMMM/truedocfont
>      MMMM/truetype
>      MMMM/webopenfont
>
> (where MMMM is some prefix yet to be determined), within which you can
> have a description of many different fonts, including Arial and ComicSans.
>
> =======
>
> *IF* we were to define a top-level media type, I do *not* think it
> should be named "font", but instead should name it "fontformat" or
> something like that. I think naming it "font" just leads people to have
> false expectations.
>
> =======
>
> I notice that if "application" were used for font format file names,
> some of the font format names would need to include the word "font" as
> part of the name. For example, "application/postscript" can not be used
> for the font format defined in the postscript standard. Instead, it
> would have to be "application/postscriptfont". This *could* be taken an
> argument for using "fontformat" as a top level type, as in
> "fontformat/postscript". However, I don't find it a convincing argument
> by itself.
>
>      Tony Hansen
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss