RE: SVG Text elements within glyphs

On Monday, January 27, 2014 5:37 PM Robert O'Callahan wrote:
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).
I am curious what would be the outcome in the following scenario:
A font has SVG glyphs that have textual elements defined with no font-family reference (just plain text fill). The font is downloaded and applied to a text span for which a style is defined as part of CSS class definition. Would then any text that is part of that particular span be rendered using a font defined by CSS? Would the same font also be applied to a textual element that is part of an SVG glyph description?

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.

Yes, we definitely need to address this as part of the ISO OFF standardization work (where the proposal was submitted).

Thank you,
Vlad



From: rocallahan@gmail.com [mailto:rocallahan@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robert O'Callahan
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 5:37 PM
To: Levantovsky, Vladimir
Cc: Chris Lilley; Daniel Flassig; public-svgopentype@w3.org
Subject: Re: SVG Text elements within glyphs

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com<mailto: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