[Justfont] Review of draft-ietf-justfont-toplevel-03.txt

Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com> Wed, 16 November 2016 03:52 UTC

Return-Path: <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
X-Original-To: justfont@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: justfont@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF66C12961F; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 19:52:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CmR6b13V9DE9; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 19:52:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FA32129441; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 19:52:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-9b02.meeting.ietf.org (unknown [31.133.155.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 85BF350A73; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 22:52:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 12:52:30 +0900
Message-Id: <18E23672-B57D-44F3-8AB5-D6EA6A336E8D@seantek.com>
To: justfont@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/justfont/7y-OvQg5G9iJsv3V76TPwCdSvJY>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: [Justfont] Review of draft-ietf-justfont-toplevel-03.txt
X-BeenThere: justfont@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Font Top Level Media Type \(just font\) WG" <justfont.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/justfont>, <mailto:justfont-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/justfont/>
List-Post: <mailto:justfont@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:justfont-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/justfont>, <mailto:justfont-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 03:52:37 -0000

I have been meaning to review this draft and finally got around to it. Since it’s been submitted to the IESG I guess I should also cc IESG.

Other than the issues mentioned in the issue tracker, I noticed:

***
8.  New Registrations


   New font formats should be registered using the online form.  RFC 6838
   should be consulted on
   registration procedures.  In particular the font specification must
   be freely available and the ABNF must be followed.  Also, an @font-
   face format should be supplied and, if used, a definition of the
   fragment identifier syntax for the new type.

***

The third sentence may not (should not) always be true. Font specifications in the vnd. and prs. facets do not need to be “freely available”. “ABNF must be followed” is used without any references. What ABNF are you referring to? Of course “the ABNF” should be followed, but that is a consequence of RFC 6838 and others; this draft does not contain any ABNF.

It is not clear what the first two sentences really add to the text:

Of course new font formats should be registered using the online form. But, they should also be discussed on media-types@iana.org prior to attempting to register them formally. I do not see a reason to write this.

Of course RFC 6838 should be consulted on registration procedures...one could write that RFC 6838 MUST be consulted on registration procedures. But, unless this document changes something about RFC 6838 (which it does not), I do not see a reason to write this.


Other than these points, the document seems to be in pretty good shape.

Best regards,

Sean