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

Minutes, 17 November 2010 Web Fonts WG telcom

From: Christopher Slye <cslye@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 08:08:14 -0800
To: "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org Group" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A023A39C-9DDC-41B8-BBD6-A4795731575C@adobe.com>
Here are the minutes of the 17 November 2010 Web Fonts Working Group telcon:

http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html


17 Nov 2010

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-irc

Attendees

   Present
   Regrets
   Chair
          Vlad

   Scribe
          cslye

Contents

     * [3]Topics
     * [4]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 17 November 2010

   Vlad: EPUB list conversation took place that WOFF is redundant for
   EPUB.

   <ChrisL> scribenick: cslye

   Vlad: Font solutions are fragmented; thinks WOFF is best solution.
   ... Many list members are undecided.

   What is the list?

   <ChrisL> [5]http://openebook.org/

      [5] http://openebook.org/

   Vlad: List is: epub@openebook.org

   I will talk to the Adobe person about it.

   jdaggett: EPUB font is embedded, not linked.

   <ChrisL> We would like woff to be ubiquitous though, and we would
   like epub to deviate from Web standarfds as little as possible

   Vlad: If the font data is packaged inside the file, it's embedded,
   and linking is not embedded.

   <ChrisL> its not embedded in the sense of being part of the same
   document file

   ChrisL: Saving web pages: Don't want EPUB to deviate too much from
   that.

   jdaggett: I don't see where we need to say explicitly that any
   particular font should be used in EPUB. Can recommend WOFF, though.

   <John> [Sorry. There seems to besomething wrong with my phone.]

   Vlad: EPUB has a "mangled font" algorithm that was optional.
   ... WOFF is a better solution since it has more support and has
   metadata.

   jdaggett: That's a dumb requirement.

   sergeym: The spec wants to avoid moving a font from one EPUB to
   aother.

   Vlad: I'm not concerned about users with proper license.

   sergeym: Just clarifying what the spec actually says.
   ... (The EPUB spec.)

   Vlad: WOFF informs the user.
   ... Keep honest people honest.
   ... Moving on...

   First agenda item: Review open action items.

   <scribe> ACTION: 29 to FAQ. [recorded in
   [6]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 29

   <ChrisL> action-29?

   <trackbot> ACTION-29 -- John Hudson to review woff faq with chris
   and vlad -- due 2010-10-06 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [7]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/29

      [7] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/29

   action-36?

   <trackbot> ACTION-36 -- Chris Lilley to recategorise the general
   conformance criteria -- due 2010-11-11 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [8]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/36

      [8] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/36

   Can be closed.

   action-37?

   <trackbot> ACTION-37 -- Chris Lilley to get cracking on test suite.
   -- due 2010-11-11 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [9]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/37

      [9] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/37

   <ChrisL> close action-36

   <trackbot> ACTION-36 Recategorise the general conformance criteria
   closed

   close action-37

   <trackbot> ACTION-37 Get cracking on test suite. closed

   <ChrisL> action-38?

   <trackbot> ACTION-38 -- John Daggett to help with font creation for
   the test suite. -- due 2010-11-11 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [10]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/38

     [10] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/38

   We will review Tal's test suite stuff today

   Vlad: Should we keep it open?

   <jdaggett> yeah, closing it sounds fine

   ChrisL: Close it and make a more specific action.

   close action-38

   <trackbot> ACTION-38 Help with font creation for the test suite.
   closed

   action-43?

   <trackbot> ACTION-43 -- Jonathan Kew to clarify that @id on uniqueid
   is required -- due 2010-11-17 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [11]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/43

     [11] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/43

   close action-43

   <trackbot> ACTION-43 Clarify that @id on uniqueid is required closed

   action-44?

   <trackbot> ACTION-44 -- Jonathan Kew to clarify schema language in
   text to say one or more text elements -- due 2010-11-17 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [12]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/44

     [12] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/44

   close action-44

   <trackbot> ACTION-44 Clarify schema language in text to say one or
   more text elements closed

   close action-45

   <trackbot> ACTION-45 Make item element a required chilkd of
   extension closed

   action-46?

   <trackbot> ACTION-46 -- Chris Lilley to add the two missing
   conformance statements and split out the stylesheet -- due
   2010-11-17 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [13]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/46

     [13] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/46

   ChrisL: They were added. Can be closed.

   close action-46

   <trackbot> ACTION-46 Add the two missing conformance statements and
   split out the stylesheet closed

   close action-47

   <trackbot> ACTION-47 Edit the media registration to say
   application/font-woff closed

   ChrisL: Was done in accordance with Last Call.

   <ChrisL> the general ones are here

   <ChrisL>
   [14]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan-General#Test_Plan_-_Gen
   eral

     [14] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan-General#Test_Plan_-_General

   ChrisL: Leave untestable things as lowercase 'must'?
   ... Take untestable things out of conformance spec.
   ... Just recommend testing them.

   jdaggett: Just mark what's not testable.

   ChrisL: I agree, but...
   ... Following CSS3 font spec is hard to test.

   jdaggett: Benefit to leaving CSS3 requirement is useful, though.

   Vlad: Better to keep these things in the spec, even if they're
   difficult/impossible to test.
   ... Let's review the test plans along with looking at Tal's stuff.

   Tal: Python script generates valid and invalid WOFF.
   ... Link them to testable assertions.
   ... Should I eliminate tests that aren't tied specifically to
   testable assertions?

   ChrisL: NO NO NO!

   Tal: Tricky to make a font that has only one thing wrong.
   ... I have a dump of test cases I have now.

   <ChrisL> ref as in reference

   jdaggett: Ref test compares two documents; can be automated.
   ... Alternate test shows PASS/FAIL, when a reference is not
   available.
   ... Let's have both kinds of tests.

   Tal: Keep the sfnt as simple as possible; with single character?

   sergeym: Existing test fonts work fine; we don't need something new.

   <tal>
   [15]http://wofftesttemp.typesupply.com/UA-Tests/useragenttestindex.h
   tml

     [15] http://wofftesttemp.typesupply.com/UA-Tests/useragenttestindex.html

   Tal: Ref tests use a raw font for comparison.

   Better to use an installed font, instead of linked?

   jdaggett: Have an installed fallback font to use as a flag, to
   indicate that fonts are loading properly.

   Vlad: Create a font with mis-mapped characters, so that "PASS" =
   "FAIL"

   <jdaggett>
   [16]http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/xhtml1/font-family-
   name-003.xht

     [16] http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/xhtml1/font-family-name-003.xht

   <ChrisL> Text fotr a 'must load' test is 'FAIL" and the font has P
   glyph for F etc so it looks like'PASS' when loaded

   <jdaggett>
   [17]http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/xhtml1/font-family-
   name-ref.xht

     [17] http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/xhtml1/font-family-name-ref.xht

   <jdaggett> those are examples of a reftest that uses

   <jdaggett> the sort of thing we're talking about

   sergeym: We need to show when fonts don't load at all. Need separate
   font for that?

   jdaggett: We have all this already.

   <ChrisL> Text for a 'must not load' test is 'PASS" and the font has
   F glyph for P etc so it looks like 'FAIL' when erroneously loaded

   tal: Some testable assertions test file format. Should a UA test
   pass even if file format is invalid?
   ... Checksums - validator will fail bad checksums, but UA should
   pass.
   ... Need test case for UA where checksums are bad, but UA will pass
   it.

   Vlad: Don't see why we need this test.

   jdaggett: We don't want UAs to be required to fail it, but they can
   if they want.

   Vlad: Do we have tests for UA with bad metadata?

   tal: I will add some of these edge cases that aren't there.

   <ChrisL> ACTION: Tal to create UA test for bad metadata [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-48 - Create UA test for bad metadata [on
   Tal Leming - due 2010-11-24].

   <scribe> ACTION: Tal to update UA test plan to include new "fringe"
   tests. [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-49 - Update UA test plan to include new
   "fringe" tests. [on Tal Leming - due 2010-11-24].

   tal: What if padding is done with something other than null bytes?

   <scribe> ACTION: Tal to update font format test plan to include new
   "fringe" tests. [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action04]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-50 - Update font format test plan to
   include new "fringe" tests. [on Tal Leming - due 2010-11-24].

   tal: Please give me comments and suggestions on test plan.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: 29 to FAQ. [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: Tal to create UA test for bad metadata [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: Tal to update font format test plan to include new
   "fringe" tests. [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: Tal to update UA test plan to include new "fringe"
   tests. [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action03]

   [End of minutes]
Received on Wednesday, 17 November 2010 16:08:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 17 November 2010 16:08:46 GMT