- From: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 12:27:02 -0400
- To: Tal Leming <tal@typesupply.com>
- CC: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@googlemail.com>, Christopher Slye <cslye@adobe.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>, "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
On Friday, May 28, 2010 11:46 AM Tal Leming wrote: > > On May 28, 2010, at 9:46 AM, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote: > > > I don't think the intention is to lock down the metadata spec and > *never* add new elements - I'd say that specifying the metadata > extension mechanism will significantly reduce the need to rev the spec > just to add new metadata, but we still can do it if and when the needs > arise. > > Of course. What I mean is that for font makers there is no point to > adding official elements to the spec after 1.0 if major implementations > won't ever show the new fields. Again, I don't think *ever* is the right word here. E.g. the new OpenType 1.6 has recently defined new OS/2 version 4. While most font engines in use today do not know what it is and only can handle fields defined in OS/2 ver. 3, it's almost certain that future implementations will be updated to support ver. 4. I think that the situation with browser support for metadata will be very similar - if spec is updated, they will eventually update their implementations to support new spec version to show new fields. However, having predefined extension mechanism for metadata makes it less likely that we will need to update the spec any time soon. Regards, Vlad
Received on Friday, 28 May 2010 16:27:52 UTC