Re: [apps-discuss] font/*

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Tue, 08 November 2011 19:57 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFD61F0C52 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:57:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.255
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pz17pxwEpK07 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:57:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3072A1F0C4A for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 11:57:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1RNrnv-000FcD-AB for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 14:57:55 -0500
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 14:57:54 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org Discuss" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <2D7514C468E718253193221B@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <555BA718-A5FA-4111-9A8B-1DE99921CCE2@standardstrack.com>
References: <4EB86078.8070904@stpeter.im> <BDC0F178EEB88CC4B3D24020@PST.JCK.COM> <4EB8D0F4.9020907@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <555BA718-A5FA-4111-9A8B-1DE99921CCE2@standardstrack.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-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 19:57:57 -0000

--On Tuesday, November 08, 2011 09:20 -0500 Eric Burger
<eburger@standardstrack.com> 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.

But...


>...

--On Tuesday, November 08, 2011 18:39 +0100 "t.petch"
<ietfc@btconnect.com> 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.

    john