Re: User scenarios which would benefit from streamable fonts

Hi everyone,

As you might have noticed, today or my last day at Google. I'm starting at
Facebook next week, but I suppose it will be a few weeks before I figure
out how to join this WG again.

Cheers,
behdad


On Fri, Feb 1, 2019, 2:44 PM Myles C. Maxfield <mmaxfield@apple.com> wrote:

>
>
> > On Jan 31, 2019, at 7:54 PM, Ken Lunde <lunde@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> > Myles,
> >
> > I should point out that the assumption of no feature interaction in
> typical CJK fonts becomes an instant non-starter for Pan-CJK fonts that
> make extensive use of the 'locl' GSUB feature to access non-default glyphs.
> The Source Han and Noto CJK fonts serve as excellent testing fodder for
> this. I should also mention that Adobe Fonts' (formerly Typekit) dynamic
> augmentation preserves the 'locl' GSUB feature functionality, which means
> that it is possible.
>
> Oh, when I said “fonts with many independent glyphs, like a Chinese font”
> I meant “independent” w/r/t context-sensitive shaping, like an Arabic or
> Indic font. Features definitely interact in CJK fonts.
>
> Unless I’m misunderstanding what you mean?
>
> >
> > Regards...
> >
> > -- Ken
> >
> >> On Jan 31, 2019, at 3:22 PM, Myles C. Maxfield <mmaxfield@apple.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello, everyone!
> >>
> >> In order to determine which strategy we should pursue for a streaming
> font interface, we should first determine which situations we are trying to
> improve. Once we have determined the specific scenarios that we are trying
> to attack, we can then create a benchmark to see how bad we are right now
> and to judge the various proposals.
> >>
> >> The document from Google sent a few days ago describes "Minimize
> latency for client to view webfont styled content.” I’m hoping we, as a
> group, can go further than this and describe:
> >>
> >> 1) Are we concerned with just first page load? Or are we concerned with
> interactions users make with pages? Are we concerned with “infinite
> scrolling” pages?
> >>
> >> 2) Which types of webpages have big problems? Is there any way to
> characterize the types of sites that should see an improvement?
> >>
> >> 3) Which types of fonts most need improvement in their loading
> experience? Fonts with many independent glyphs, like a Chinese font? Fonts
> with complex shaping rules? Fonts with complicated outlines?
> >>    => The Google Fonts corpus could provide some big insights here.
> Which fonts are the ones that require big downloads but have much of the
> file unused by the browser? Can such fonts be characterized? In general,
> which fonts are the most popular?
> >>
> >> 4) Regarding comparison against the existing unicode-range solution,
> should we try to make a cost function that includes both breaks in shaping
> and latency? Or should we consider that a break in shaping should be
> forbidden? Should we try to incorporate how many text flashes occur during
> each user interaction?
> >>
> >> Figuring out the answers to questions like these will help us better be
> able to weigh each possible solution. I’d love to hear everyone’s thoughts
> about these sorts of things.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Myles
> >
>
>
>