W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webfonts-wg@w3.org > June 2012

Minutes, 6 June Webfonts WG call

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 22:44:17 +0200
Message-ID: <482868711.20120606224417@w3.org>
To: WOFF Working Group <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
Hello folks,

http://www.w3.org/2012/06/06-webfonts-minutes.html

and below as text for the tracker bot

WebFonts Working Group Teleconference

06 Jun 2012

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2012/06/06-webfonts-irc

Attendees

   Present
          [Microsoft], ChrisL, Vlad, sylvaing, tal,
          +1.650.253.aaaa, Raph, jfkthame, +1.408.536.aabb

   Regrets
   Chair
          Vlad

   Scribe
          Chris

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]UA Test Suite results
         2. [5]review proposed draft charter
     * [6]Summary of Action Items
     __________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 06 June 2012

   <scribe> Scribe: Chris

   <scribe> ScribeNick: ChrisL

   sergeym, thanks for subbmitting the IE10 results

   hoping this might be a short call because of those

   <sergeym> No problem

   [7]http://w3c-test.org/framework/results/woff-ua/

      [7] http://w3c-test.org/framework/results/woff-ua/

   291 of 291 required tests meet CR exit criteria.

   CR exit criteria have been met.

   <Vlad> Chris, are you coming back?

UA Test Suite results

   <Vlad> See [8]http://w3c-test.org/framework/results/woff-ua/
   for the latest updates

      [8] http://w3c-test.org/framework/results/woff-ua/

   291 of 291 required tests meet CR exit criteria.

   CR exit criteria have been met.

   I added results from Chrome 19 today

   also the latest Opera beta (no change unfortunately)

   Vlad: first order of business is updated UA results

   Raph: the chromium bug strictly check table padding

   Vlad: we have met the CR exit criteria

   ChrisL: added Chrome 19 and Opera 12 beta rwsults, plus
   Microsoft sent in the IE10/Win8 results
   ... the advantage of making no changes is we avoid another last
   call

   Vlad: maybe we can raise the issue with the OT spec folks to
   get 'highly recommended' changed to 'mist' in line with the
   implementations

   sergeym: agree

   Vlad: most impls expect that anyway
   ... some will reject a font that has no last-table padding

   tal: who knows what is in the Apple sfnt parser?

   (no-one)

   === quote ===

   This Chromium bug tracks the recent update to OTS to make it
   fully comply with the W3C spec for strictly checking table
   padding.

   [9]http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=109813

      [9] http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=109813

   I believe this make the implementation comply with the spec, so
   hopefully there are no further issues.

   === /quote ===

   Vlad (explains email list)

   ChrisL: so this gives a more strict path for the WOFF path

   Raph: yes
   ... could revisit if OT spec changes

   (discussion on how many OT fonts in the wild miss trailing
   padding)

   Raph: older fonts more likely to be brioken

   jfkthame: pathc is identical to one i did for Firefox, to make
   it pass the same test case.
   ... so if that goes into OTS upstream we will inherit it

   Raph: can unblock WOFF and make OT more strict later

   jfkthame: would still be slow to reject as known fonts that
   would break. Stricter spec still a good thing longer term

   Resolved: move WOFF 1.0 to Proposed Recommendation

review proposed draft charter

   [10]http://www.w3.org/2012/06/WebFonts/draft-charter.html

     [10] http://www.w3.org/2012/06/WebFonts/draft-charter.html

   "This proposed charter adds the evaluation of, and (if
   favourable) the standardisation of, this new method or some
   variation on it, as a deliverable of the existing WebFonts
   Working Group. "

   jfkthame: at first glance this looks reasonable

   Vlad: (explains original and new draft charters)

   Raph: milestones still show a WOFF 2.0
   ... so standardisation is in scope
   ... totally fine with that change
   ... hope more people do their own tests, like CPU usage on
   mobile
   ... now on Android team btw, which does not imply any problem
   with the Fonts group - but more focus on fonts for mobile
   ... in favour of careful evaluation and consideration of
   alternatives. Not set in stone. Better alternatives, or
   unforseen problems, should be addressed

   Vlad: still Google's rep to this WG?

   Raph: yes
   ... definitely have time allocation for W3C standards work

   Vlad: so we think the charter is good, then we can go forward
   to AC review

   ChrisL: (explains process)

   Vlad: ensure we get adequate responses over summer, and all set
   for TPAC

   sylvaing: any f2f beffore tpac?

   Vlad: no

   s/vef/bef/

   Vlad: more likelyy one f2f a year plus mostly online

   ChrisL: when will this patch start showing up in Chrome and
   Safari?

   Raph: likey to ship in Chroime within 12 weeks, and canary
   version in 6 weeks.
   ... safari I don't know
   ... and does not use OTS AFAIK
   ... use own code for that. OTS is a separate repo

   ChrisL: unfortunate that Opera not present, believe they use it
   also

   Raph: should show up in nightlies in next day or two
   ... Tab could say more

   ChrisL: the IE10 needs a Win8 preview?

   sylvaing: can run in a VM

   Vlad: Raph we are on IRC as well as on the phone

   cslye: who will be at Typecon?

   Raph: no

   cslye: just curious

   [11]http://www.typecon.com/

     [11] http://www.typecon.com/

   <raph> hi all!

   <raph> i'll make sure to use this next call

   <Vlad> Hi Raph

   (adjourned)

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]

-- 
 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, 6 June 2012 20:44:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 6 June 2012 20:44:30 GMT