W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: Last call comments on WOFF (4)

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 15:45:19 +0100
Message-ID: <70172390.20110209154519@w3.org>
To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
CC: www-font@w3.org
On Wednesday, January 12, 2011, 4:16:26 PM, Bert wrote:

BB> 4) Section 6 Extended metadata: If it is in XML and is metadata, it  
BB> would seem logical to have chosen XMP. Existing XMP and RDF tools  
BB> would be able to read it, no need for new parsers; it could be linked
BB> to other RDF ontologies, to enable Semantic Web tools to make  
BB> inferences; and it would be extensible without the need to have  
BB> different syntaxes for predefined and extended elements.

We aren't sure exactly what you are asking for.

Are you asking that the entire metadata section be replaced by a block written in the Adobe XMP language? If so, are there examples where XMP has been used to express licensing information 9for fonts or for other media, such as images)?

Are you asking that the entire metadata section be replaced by an entirely open-ended 'anything you want as long as its RDF' block, and if so how could that be interpreted in there is no predefined vocabulary at all?

Tracker, this relates to ACTION-71: Clarify Bert Bos' Point 4

 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, 9 February 2011 14:45:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:42 UTC