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

Re: WOFF spec comments (was Re: Metadata Questions)

From: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@googlemail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 21:47:07 +0000
Cc: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, WOFF Working Group FONT <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>, Vladimir Levantovsky <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
Message-Id: <A66E65D2-6F43-4798-9E4E-CFDA03DE3D1C@gmail.com>
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>

On 10 Nov 2010, at 20:52, Chris Lilley wrote:

> On Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 9:40:52 PM, John wrote:
> JD> Chris Lilley wrote:
>>> I seem to recall discussion that the OT spec required padding
>>> between tables but was silent or ambiguous about padding after the
>>> last table.
> JD> I should point out here that the OT spec doesn't *require*
> JD> padding, it merely recommends it.
> JD> http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otspec/recom.htm
> Thanks for the correction. "It is suggested" is pretty weak, especially followed by a 'should'.

There's stronger language elsewhere in the spec:

Quote: "Note: This function implies that the length of a table must be a multiple of four bytes. In fact, a font is not considered structurally proper without the correct padding. All tables must begin on four byte boundries, and any remaining space between tables is padded with zeros."


Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2010 21:48:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:34:14 UTC