[Justfont] Internet Media type for font collections

Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> Sat, 06 February 2016 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <chris@w3.org>
X-Original-To: justfont@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: justfont@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB14E1A00FC for <justfont@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 06:21:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 7kIl518VeBvW for <justfont@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 06:21:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from raoul.w3.org (raoul.w3.org [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 ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB8EF1A00FA for <justfont@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 06:21:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cim06-h01-31-32-14-119.dsl.sta.abo.bbox.fr ([31.32.14.119] helo=M6700) by raoul.w3.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.1:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <chris@w3.org>) id 1aS3jz-000BKQ-Kt; Sat, 06 Feb 2016 14:21:35 +0000
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2016 15:21:32 +0100
From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Organization: W3C
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <175815705.20160206152132@w3.org>
To: justfont@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/justfont/QA9boCBjA4b80bUg1lvr-v2Wx3o>
Subject: [Justfont] Internet Media type for font collections
X-BeenThere: justfont@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: justfont@ietf.org
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: Sat, 06 Feb 2016 14:21:39 -0000

Hello,

It is unclear in the current spec what Internet media Type to use for
Collections (previously, TrueType Collections but now expanded to
OpenType as well). I can see several possibilities, which have
different impacts on the spec.

a) Just use font/truetype for TTC.
+ avoids adding another type
- no way to indicate support for collections in an Accept header
- complicates specifying a fragment identifier (only sometimes legal)

consequences:
  need to add .ttc to the file types section
  change fragment identifiers to allow an optional fragment (but only
  if ttc)

Similarly, just use font/opentype for OTC (is .otc the usual filetype?)
(same pluses, minuses and consequences as for TTC)

b) Same as a) but add a parameter like collection="true" or something.
I don't like this option, partly because params are often awkward to
configure on servers and tend to be little used (or hard coded to
particular filetypes) and also because it has all the disadvantages of
a) regarding optional fragments.

c) Define two new media types, for TTC (TrueType outlines, no OpenType
layout) and for OTC (CFF or TTF outlines, OpenType Layout)
- two more types (but at least, no parameters)
+ easy to map to existing filetypes .ttc .otc
+ fragment identifier easy to specify (numeric, the n'th font in the
collection where n starts at one. If omitted, same as #1)
+ Easy to use in an Accept header

Option c) is my preferred option, would be interested to hear what
others think.

This refers to github issues:
   Media type for OpenType collections #6
   https://github.com/svgeesus/ietf-justfont/issues/6

    Fragment syntax for collections #7
    https://github.com/svgeesus/ietf-justfont/issues/7

although the main question for #7 is what media type to put the
fragment syntax onto. The actual syntax of #1, #2 is uncontroversial
and already used (but as a non-normative example) in CSS3 Fonts.

-- 
Best regards,
 Chris  Lilley
 Technical Director, W3C Interaction Domain