Re: [apps-discuss] font/*

John C Klensin <> Tue, 08 November 2011 19:57 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFD61F0C52 for <>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:57:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.255
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.255 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.344, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pz17pxwEpK07 for <>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:57:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3072A1F0C4A for <>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:57:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] (helo=localhost) by with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1RNrnv-000FcD-AB for; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 14:57:55 -0500
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 14:57:54 -0500
From: John C Klensin <>
To: " Discuss" <>
Message-ID: <2D7514C468E718253193221B@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <BDC0F178EEB88CC4B3D24020@PST.JCK.COM> <> <>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] font/*
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 19:57:57 -0000

--On Tuesday, November 08, 2011 09:20 -0500 Eric Burger
<> wrote:

> Is the idea we would see something like
> 	font/Times
> or one of 
> 	font/PostScript/Times
> 	font/TrueType/Times
> 	font/OpenType/Times
> 	font/METATYPE/Times
> or one of
> 	font/Times/PostScript
> 	font/Times/TrueType
> 	font/Times/OpenType
> 	font/Times/METATYPE
> One cannot just say it's font/* and assume it is an opaque
> container, as one could see battles over the latter examples.

Yes, that is part of what I was concerned about.

If the intent is merely to pass the descriptions/ definitions
around, then things like
   font/TrueType name="Times" 
might work, where "TrueType" is what I called a description
language in my earlier note.



--On Tuesday, November 08, 2011 18:39 +0100 "t.petch"
<> wrote:

> BTW, before naming this thing, please have a discussion with a
> typographer about the difference between a "font" and a
> "typeface."
> <tp>
> and typeface, versus typeface family (which, I suspect, is
> what many mean when they say 'font')
> Tom Petch
> </tp>

Indeed.  And that is why I made the comment about size ranges
(for description types that facilitate scaling) and about
styles. Does, e.g., 
   font/TrueType name="Times"
require that the entire typeface family be sent?  Think about
what happens if one wants to send the Bold style only.  Is 

   font/TrueType name="Times" style="Bold" 

sufficient?  Can TrueType handle some or all of that internally?
Is external labeling (as part of the Content Type) needed to
provide a referencing handle?  Can all of the other description
formats do the same thing.

Note that it is common to have mail messages in which a body
part (possibly text/html) references images that are additional
body parts of the same message.   Could one contemplate sending
a font and the content that uses it in the same message?  Does
that create any special issues?

I think this is probably worth doing, but I think there are a
lot of questions to be answered... and that the result is
unlikely to be a one-page RFC.

For example, I can see a really interesting IANA registry for
subtypes and keywords coming along -- probably not with a
one-page spec.