W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2011

Re: SVG Fonts inside of OpenType fonts? [Cross-post from www-font@w3.org]

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:00:44 +1200
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <20110628220044.GB12400@wok.mcc.id.au>
Boris Zbarsky:
> There are several different versions of SVG fonts.  SVG Tiny 1.2
> fonts don't allow that sort of thing (since you can't put an
> <html:video> in SVG Tiny 1.2 at all).
> 
> So it should be possible to standardize a definition of SVG fonts
> that restricts the glyph geometry descriptions in a sane way.

To be honest, if we want to allow SMIL animations inside the glyphs
(which would help with the animated emoji case) then I don’t see it as
too much of a stretch to allow an <html:video> inside there to play.  I
agree though that allowing <svg:animate> to work is much more useful
than <html:video> (inside an <svg:foreignObject>, presumably).

Let’s not choose the SVG Tiny 1.2 style fonts, though.  If we’re
embedding them in an OpenType font, it gives us no advantage beyond
allowing self-intersecting curves, etc.

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 22:01:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:41 GMT