On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Levantovsky, Vladimir < Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com> wrote: > I am concerned that recursive process may present another challenge. Let's > assume for a moment that there is an SVG glyph which contains textual > elements, which include a character that would need to be rendered using > the very same glyph description that contains textual element, which > include a character that ... where does it end? > AFAIK this can't happen for downloaded fonts. The reasons why are interesting. A glyphs document is not permitted to perform loads of external resources, so a downloaded font cannot refer directly to itself via a normal URI. A glyphs document could load an inner font using a data: URI, but obviously that can't be the same font for size reasons. A glyphs document could load an inner font using a blob: URI, but that also can't be the same font (since a Web app doesn't know the Blob URI until the Blob is completely constructed, so it can't put the Blob URI into the Blob itself; also Blob URIs contain 128 random bits so can't be guessed). However, a locally installed font with SVG glyphs could refer to itself by its own family name. I'm not sure if we need to do anything about that. Rob -- Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr, 'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w
Received on Monday, 27 January 2014 22:36:59 UTC