Re: [apps-discuss] font/* (and draft-freed-media-type-regs)

TianLinyi <tianlinyi@huawei.com> Thu, 17 November 2011 14:10 UTC

Return-Path: <tianlinyi@huawei.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 80DD811E8126 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 06:10:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.405, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 BjJxS4tmSAgK for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 06:10:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0C1F11E80E4 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 06:10:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LUT002PQ5XRQ3@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 22:08:15 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LUT008D85XR6D@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 22:08:15 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxeml207-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id AFD47142; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 22:07:11 +0800
Received: from SZXEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.95) by szxeml207-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 22:07:04 +0800
Received: from SZXEML513-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.59]) by szxeml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.95]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 22:06:59 +0800
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:06:59 +0000
From: TianLinyi <tianlinyi@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <042901cca51f$d3ff60c0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
X-Originating-IP: [172.24.2.41]
To: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>, "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
Message-id: <3615F3CCD55F054395A882F51C6E5FDA1820227B@szxeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312
Content-language: zh-CN
Content-transfer-encoding: base64
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Thread-topic: [apps-discuss] font/* (and draft-freed-media-type-regs)
Thread-index: AQHMpR/QnPX+VrnbTTGaIgyaA9nG5pWxGVU8
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
References: <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D0611DABF0F@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <4EC0C2C8.2010500@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <01O8EV98HXC800RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <99733F9E-CF97-40BD-B438-300E309D3BF4@apple.com> <7534F85A589E654EB1E44E5CFDC19E3D117FCD6BF2@wob-email-01.agfamonotype.org> <4EC31D1D.1000509@stpeter.im> <7534F85A589E654EB1E44E5CFDC19E3D117FCD6ED2@wob-email-01.agfamonotype.org> <042901cca51f$d3ff60c0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Cc: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, "gadams@xfsi.com" <gadams@xfsi.com>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] font/* (and draft-freed-media-type-regs)
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: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:10:39 -0000

Hi, All

Since there is no clear advantage for both ways, is there any guidance on how to make a decision? I think we don't need to spend too much time on this. Maybe it is the time to make a choice now based on rough consensus, right? Or if there is an alternative way to get guidance from somewhere in IETF first regarding how to create a top level registry?

Cheers,
Linyi

________________________________________
发件人: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 t.petch [ietfc@btconnect.com]
发送时间: 2011年11月17日 19:55
到: Levantovsky, Vladimir
Cc: Chris Lilley; David Singer; apps-discuss@ietf.org; gadams@xfsi.com
主题: Re: [apps-discuss] font/* (and draft-freed-media-type-regs)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
To: "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Cc: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>; "Ned Freed" <ned.freed@mrochek.com>; "David
Singer" <singer@apple.com>; <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; <gadams@xfsi.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 9:01 PM
> Adding Chris Lilley from W3C
>
> On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 9:17 PM Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> >
> > On 11/16/11 7:22 AM, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote:
> >
> > > However, the sentiments expressed at the time were very similar to
> > > this discussion; I was told that applying for a new top-level type
> > > was "A BIG NO-NO", that prior attempts to register font/* failed, and
> > > that unless I am willing to dedicate significant part of my life to
> > > this activity (i.e. applying and lobbying for a new top-level "font"
> > > type) the effort would most likely get us nowhere.
> >
> > Perhaps I am mistaken, but I read the discussion differently: I see an
> > openness to registering font/* now.
> >
> > My personal opinion is that registering font/* type still makes a lot of
sense and this is something we need to do, even if it involves re-registering
some of the existing subtypes under the new font/* tree. I brought this up for
discussion at today's conference call with W3C WebFonts WG, and the general
opinion was that having font/* type registered would still be a good thing for
the industry.
>
Vlad

Just to be clear, what meaning does WebFonts attach to 'font', were it an object
class, how would it be characterised?  This thread has shown a number of
different meanings of the term and I am not familiar with the work of W3C.

Tom Petch

> Thank you,
> Vlad
>

_______________________________________________
apps-discuss mailing list
apps-discuss@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss