Re: Gen-ART IETF Last Call review of draft-ietf-justfont-toplevel-03

"Chris Lilley" <> Thu, 08 December 2016 18:45 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71C14129508; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:45:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.796
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XxGFbKluuwPY; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:45:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:8b2d:804:52:12:128:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD81A129530; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:45:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ([]) by with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1cF3hH-0008fu-6O; Thu, 08 Dec 2016 18:45:35 +0000
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_53567836.423445769569"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 13:45:28 -0500
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Gen-ART IETF Last Call review of draft-ietf-justfont-toplevel-03
From: Chris Lilley <>
To: "Dale R. Worley" <>,,,
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
User-Agent: Mailbird/
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 18:45:39 -0000

On 2016-10-30 18:18:29, Dale R. Worley <> wrote:

7.5. WOFF 1.0

Macintosh Universal Type Identifier code: "org.w3c.woff"

Is this part of a media type registration? (If so, is it required for
all "font" subtypes?)
Chris Lilley: 

I opened an issue on Macintosh type codes:

There are two Apple-specific systems: the old four-character Macintosh Type Codes mentioned in the Media Types registration template, which were in use up to Mac OS 9 but are no longer used, and the newer Universal Type Identifiers used in OS X.

I raised the issue of which to use (on

and got a swift response from Ned Freed suggesting that the legacy Macintosh Type Codes were of little value, and that adding the current Macintosh  UTI was probably beneficial.

In response, I checked all the  Macintosh Type Codes in the current document; they all say "(no code specified)" which seems optimal.

I also looked at the Apple documentation for UTIs. There are two forms, the 'public' ones defined by Apple and the extensible, java-style reverse DNS ones for other organisations.

There is a registry of the public ones, including font-related UTIs like public.truetype-font and so on

I added these to the current document, so all font subtypes now have this information.

I have thus closed this issue.

Chris Lilley
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media