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

David Singer <singer@apple.com> Tue, 15 November 2011 01:59 UTC

Return-Path: <singer@apple.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 70E3911E82DA for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:59:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 XMStI0PSNO+B for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:59:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-out.apple.com (mail-out.apple.com [17.151.62.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D0011E816C for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:59:38 -0800 (PST)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Boundary_(ID_WjTW5upL3PDd9wc9rQTuzw)"
Received: from relay16.apple.com ([17.128.113.55]) by mail-out.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Exchange Server 7u4-20.01 64bit (built Nov 21 2010)) with ESMTP id <0LUO009Z8IUACLJ4@mail-out.apple.com> for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:59:37 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 11807137-b7c56ae0000051ed-ea-4ec1c7835e0c
Received: from [17.151.71.218] (Unknown_Domain [17.151.71.218]) by relay16.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 01.16.20973.587C1CE4; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:59:36 -0800 (PST)
From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
In-reply-to: <4EC1BD19.6050407@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:59:30 -0800
Message-id: <8063B542-6DD3-4D0E-8BFB-6443724284F1@apple.com>
References: <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D0611DABF0F@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <3C5268E5-FE9E-4148-8955-0450304BB407@apple.com> <4EC1BD19.6050407@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst=22?= <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpikeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IRnO5+S7fj+EE/g2uXrCxWv1zBZtF+9wq7 xbaDSxgtrj26z2Lx784EZgdWj2k/e5g9dh39we6xZMlPJo+myzOYPJbN3cMSwBrFZZOSmpNZ llqkb5fAlXFlSydbweWLrBUnHk1kb2D8sJu1i5GTQ0LARGLeodNsELaYxIV764FsLg4hgY2M Ei/nfmAESQgLuEgsurSeCcTmFTCWWHPrHQuIzSwQJXHu9hKwGjYBVYkHc46B2ZwC+hJ9G9+D 1bMAxe+dvww2lFlgCaPE7p4nrBCDbCSm7v7MCLFtKaPE1DczwRIiAu4SjT9usUCcJC/R8vUO 2wRGvllIls9CshzC1pZYtvA1M4StJ/Gy6R07hO0pcfhOH9sssOW9QB/1noIqUpSY0v2QHVUz B5CtIzF5IeMCRs5VjIJFqTmJlYZmeokFBTmpesn5uZsYQTHTUGi+g3H7X7lDjAIcjEo8vArh B/2EWBPLiitzDzFKcDArifAGlQGFeFMSK6tSi/Lji0pzUosPMUpzsCiJ85btAkoJpCeWpGan phakFsFkmTg4pRoYdzLNY9c0Fp5z6JXhpmrzs8y95epaNfmrmBdPC+9rKxCtcdmusI53X5bW zlXpVZeFK5/0H5yszuMVljdf7uTe1/1bRbT+rnc81jaJKVpmdueUZQdi3qxQcfh/acPb57Os xL4zrOSX0WDMvPwmuPO0B2/jBd6ZV1IvP/5cfPaeQ+KS5b8XLDjmrsRSnJFoqMVcVJwIAL7l OcSVAgAA
Cc: "gadams@xfsi.com" <gadams@xfsi.com>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 01:59:39 -0000

On Nov 14, 2011, at 17:15 , Martin J. Dürst wrote:

> On 2011/11/15 3:35, David Singer wrote:
>> 
>> On Nov 12, 2011, at 12:25 , Larry Masinter wrote:
>> 
>>> I see no use case for why having font/opentype is any better than application/opentype
>>> 
>>> The only use case I can imagine from looking at
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-singer-font-mime-00
>>> is the possibility of defining common parameters across font data types (in the same way that text/.. has a common charset parameter).
>> 
>> How serious is the first concern "First, the  "application" sub-tree is treated (correctly) with great caution with respect to viruses and other active code."?
> 
> I very much think that having a  font/ top level type is actually a good idea. But I hinted at this before: a type shouldn't be treated as "more safe" just because it says font/, rather than application/. Many font formats contain active code that is executed by the font engine. Several security holes have been found in this area. So I'd actually de-emphasize or remove this point. draft-singer-font-mime-00 also doesn't have a security section, and it of course needs one.
> 

It's very old.  I did it in a way I used to do I-Ds -- matching Word layout with nroff commands embedded as hidden text, so it could be saved as plain text, piped through nroff, and then through that old tool that fiddled with nroff output to make an I-D.

Here it is, it's all yours!


> 
>> (The reason I abandoned the draft was not the difficulty of getting it through, by the way, but because the W3C Timed Text group decided it didn't need it).
> 
> Can you be more specific? E.g., does Timed Text only use one font format? Or does it not contain any field that indicates the format, which makes this "somebody else's problem"?

I think that was it.

> Or some other reason?
> 
> Regards,    Martin.

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.