W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webfonts-wg@w3.org > November 2010

Re: several small spec comments

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 20:42:03 +0100
Message-ID: <407163803.20101110204203@w3.org>
To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
CC: public-webfonts-wg@w3.org
On Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 7:53:49 PM, John wrote:

JD> Several small comments regarding the spec.  

JD> Overall:

JD> I think the styling for testing should be moved to an alternate
JD> stylesheet.

Agreed; as I said a couple of times on calls and at the f2f, this should be in an alternate stylesheet but I left it in the main one for the meeting, to facilitate discussion of the 

JD> Section 3:

>> If either or both of the metadata or private blocks is not present

JD> *are* not present

Yes

JD> Appendix A:

>> Media Type registration

JD> This should be in a separate appendix.

Yes; it was intended to be. While editing live during the f2f, I was concentrating mainly on the text not on the numbering.

>> Subtype name:

>>    font-woff

JD> This is dependent on the top-level domain issue.  I would suggest:

JD>   woff or font-woff, depending on the type name used

Agreed.

JD> One other minor nit, the date of the spec should be updated to reflect
JD> the actual edit date.

Yes. Again, I didn't do that at the time because it was being edited live.




-- 
 Chris Lilley   Technical Director, Interaction Domain                 
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
 Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2010 19:43:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 10 November 2010 19:43:47 GMT