Re: [Justfont] New draft, includes text for the three remaining issues.

[Wendy Seltzer <[e-mail]>]

Hi Chris and WG,

We won't be meeting in B-A, but that shouldn't keep us from making
progress! Do we have group consensus on the issue resolutions Chris
proposes in the -01 draft?

Does anyone have further comments or issues with the -01 draft?

Thanks,
--Wendy

On 03/02/2016 12:19 PM, Chris Lilley wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> A new -01 draft was published,
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-justfont-toplevel/
> (link has text, pdf and html version)
> 
> with text incorporating discussions on the three remaining issues:
> 
> * Multiple outlines #2
> https://github.com/svgeesus/ietf-justfont/issues/2
> 
> The new draft includes the suggested wording from Vlad Levantovsky, a
> bit more open-ended than what I had suggested, to allow for future
> spec changes. It defers to the OFF spec on allowed combinations rather
> than listing those which are currently possible.
> 
> Either way, it clarifies that there is no magic number of fonts
> containing SVG outlines.
> 
> *  Media type for OpenType collections #6
> https://github.com/svgeesus/ietf-justfont/issues/6
> 
> The new draft defines the font/collection type. On advice from Ken
> Lunde and Rod Sheeter, just the one type is used for both TrueType
> Collections and (Opentype) Collections, and the suggested filename
> extension is .ttf for both, to conform to common practice.
> 
> *  Fragment syntax for collections #7
> https://github.com/svgeesus/ietf-justfont/issues/7
> 
> This uses the same fragment syntax as is used (in an illustrative
> example) in the CSS3 Fonts spec. It is used on font/collection and
> also on font/woff2 because unlike woff1, woff2 can encode collections.
> 
> The spec language also adresses the interpretation when the fragment
> is omitted (it is the first font in the collection), and for woff2,
> also what happens if a fragment is provided but the woff does not
> encode a collection (fragment ignored, no effect).
> 
> Does the new draft correctly capture the group consensus? If so, I can
> close off these issues.
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- [e-mail] +1.617.715.4883 (office)
Policy Counsel and Domain Lead, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
https://wendy.seltzer.org/        +1.617.863.0613 (mobile)