- From: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 12:46:45 -0800
- To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <vladimir.levantovsky@monotype.com>, Sairus Patel <sppatel@adobe.com>, "mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com" <mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, "public-svgopentype@w3.org" <public-svgopentype@w3.org>
Thanks Vlad. Here's an updated text based on your and Chris's feedback: Under 2.2.3 SVG Document Index Entry, before the last paragraph ("For further details about the content of the SVG documents..."), add: """ While SVG 1.1 requires [0] in addition to plain text encoding that conforming SVG implementations must correctly support gzip-encoded [RFC1952] and deflate-encoded [RFC1951] data streams, this specification requires that conforming SVG implementations must correctly support plain-text and gzip-encoded [RFC1952] data streams only. In both cases, svgDocLength encodes the length of the encoded data, not the decoded document. """ [0] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/conform.html#ConformingSVGViewers On 14-11-21 08:55 AM, 'Levantovsky, Vladimir' vladimir.levantovsky@monotype.com [mpeg-OTspec] wrote: > > > Thank you Behdad. > I have adopted your suggested language with one minor editorial change - for > svgDocLength description I would like to change the beginning of the last > sentence to read "In both cases, ..." specifically referring to only two > possible options of either plain-text SVG or gzip compressed SVG content. Any > objections? > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Behdad Esfahbod [mailto:behdad.esfahbod@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Behdad > Esfahbod > Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 9:25 PM > To: Levantovsky, Vladimir; Sairus Patel; mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com; Cameron > McCormack; Chris Lilley; public-svgopentype@w3.org > Subject: Re: [OpenType] Re: [mpeg-OTspec] SVGZ in SVG+OpenType > > As promised, here's the proposed addition to the SVG_in_OpenType spec. Under > 2.2.3 SVG Document Index Entry, before the last paragraph ("For further > details about the content of the SVG documents..."), add: > > """ > While SVG 1.1 requires [0] that conforming SVG implementations must correctly > support gzip-encoded [RFC1952] and deflate-encoded [RFC1951] data streams, > this specification requires that conforming SVG implementations must correctly > support plain-text and gzip-encoded [RFC1952] data streams only. In any case, > svgDocLength encodes the length of the encoded data, not the decoded document. > """ > > [0] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/conform.html#ConformingSVGViewers > > Cheers, > behdad > > > > On 14-10-29 09:55 AM, 'Levantovsky, Vladimir' > vladimir.levantovsky@monotype.com [mpeg-OTspec] wrote: >> >> >> Hi Sairus, >> >> I am at the W3C TPAC meeting this week (in Santa Clara), and Chris, >> Behdad and I had a chance to discuss whether the compressed SVG >> encoding is already part of the specification that we are referencing. >> If this is the case, it is indeed possible to simply add a >> clarification language to the text of the standard to explain what >> types of SVG encodings that can be used for glyph descriptions, and >> this is definitely something that can also be independently described >> in the appropriate section of the SVG Integration document. Behdad has >> agreed to review the current OFF text and make a proposal on what parts need > to be changed / clarified, and I will talk to Chris to discuss the details. >> >> When it comes to implementations - I believe that mandating what each >> individual implementation may or may not support is out of scope of >> the OFF standard. We define technologies and tools to enable certain >> levels of functionality, and in order to ensure interoperability the >> OFF spec does define a core set of required tables but it would be too >> overreaching to try to mandate what a particular implementations do as >> their supported functionality is usually determined by target markets >> / language /application requirements. I don't think we can change that easily. >> >> Thank you, >> Vlad >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com] >> On Behalf Of Sairus Patel sppatel@adobe.com [mpeg-OTspec] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 10:36 AM >> To: opentype-list@indx.co.uk; mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com; Cameron >> McCormack; Chris Lilley >> Subject: Re: [OpenType] Re: [mpeg-OTspec] SVGZ in SVG+OpenType >> >> Cam/Chris, could support of such encodings (gzip, deflate) be seen as >> required of SVG viewers even for an "SVG Integration" such as SVG-in-OT? >> Or could the encodings be restricted just to plaintext and gzipped >> content for SVG-in-OT? Is there a reason to reject deflate? Perhaps >> all should be allowed, and the fact that certain impls may not support >> all of them could be pointed out in the spec and seen as an impl >> limitation. The font-making world already has many "best/prudent practices" > to keep in mind and this will be one of them. >> >> Vlad: if it's clear that this is a clarification, can it be added >> without going through the amendment process? That would simplify >> things, e.g. for developers who right now don't have a central place >> to find the latest SVG-in-OT spec. >> >> By the way, all the color formats are OpenType (well, OFF) now, and >> are not Adobe/Mozilla's or Microsoft's or Google's. In my view, impls >> should try to or aim to support all of them: SVG, glyph overlay, and >> color bitmaps, just as impls should aim to support CFF as well as TT. >> >> Sairus >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org> >> Reply-To: "opentype-list@indx.co.uk" <opentype-list@indx.co.uk> >> Date: Sunday, October 26, 2014 at 6:04 PM >> To: "listmaster@indx.co.uk" <listmaster@indx.co.uk> >> Subject: [OpenType] Re: [mpeg-OTspec] SVGZ in SVG+OpenType >> >>>Message from OpenType list: >>> >>> >>>Thanks Chris, >>> >>>On 14-10-26 05:07 PM, Chris Lilley chris@w3.org [mpeg-OTspec] wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Hello Behdad, >>>> >>>> Saturday, October 25, 2014, 9:56:18 AM, you wrote: >>>> >>>>> Allow gzip-compressed SVG documents where SVG documents are >>>>> currently accepted. >>>> >>>> This is a useful clarification. I say clarification because a >>>> conforming SVG viewer is already required to accept gzip-compressed >>>> content: >>>> >>>> SVG implementations must correctly support gzip-encoded [RFC1952] >>>> and deflate-encoded [RFC1951] data streams, for any content type >>>> (including SVG, script files, images). >>> >>>Right. You mentioned this before, and I tried to confirm it, but got >>>confused and thought the requirements only affect HTTP transport. I >>>checked again now and see your point. >>> >>>This distinction is important though, because if your reasoning is to >>>be followed, then deflate-encoded SVG must also be supported. >>> >>>However, from the point of view of SVG+OpenType specification / >>>working group, they may not feel bound by the SVG viewer conformance >>>requirements. >>> >>>Anyway, I think you know better what the implications are one way or >>>another. >>> In the mean time I'll go build a font, such that Jonathan can take a >>>look at implementing it in Firefox. >>> >>>behdad >>> >>>> SVG implementations that support HTTP must support these encodings >>>> according to the HTTP 1.1 specification [RFC2616]; in particular, >>>> the client must specify with an "Accept-Encoding:" request header >>>> [HTTP-ACCEPT-ENCODING] those encodings that it accepts, including at >>>> minimum gzip and deflate, and then decompress any gzip-encoded and >>>> deflate-encoded data streams that are downloaded from the server. >>>> When an SVG viewer retrieves compressed content (e.g., an .svgz >>>> file) over HTTP, if the "Content-Encoding" and "Transfer-Encoding" >>>> response headers are missing or specify a value that does not match >>>> the compression method that has been applied to the content, then >>>> the SVG viewer must not render the content and must treat the >>>> document as being in error. >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/conform.html#ConformingSVGViewers >>>> >>>>> As there are only one current implementations and the format is >>>>>backwards compatible, it was recommended on the mailing list by >>>>>Sairus to keep the table version number to the current number. >>>> >>>> Yes, I think that makes sense; because arguably implementations >>>> should have accepted this from the start. If they did not, they were >>>> non-conforming. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Best regards, >>>> Chris Lilley, Technical Director, W3C Interaction Domain >>>> >>>> >>> >>>-- >>>behdad >>>http://behdad.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>>List archive: http://www.indx.co.uk/biglistarchive/ >>> >>>subscribe: opentype-subscribe@indx.co.uk >>>unsubscribe: opentype-unsubscribe@indx.co.uk >>>messages: opentype-list@indx.co.uk >>> >>> >> >> ------------------------------------ >> >> ------------------------------------ >> >> ------------------------------------ >> >> Yahoo Groups Links >> >> > > -- > behdad > http://behdad.org/ > > __._,_.___ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Posted by: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Reply via web post > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mpeg-OTspec/conversations/messages/1261;_ylc=X3oDMTJxdWRqNGFrBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyODYwOTU1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNjAzMDM4OQRtc2dJZAMxMjYxBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTQxNjU4ODkzOA--?act=reply&messageNum=1261> > • Reply to sender > <mailto:Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5BOpenType%5D%20Re%3A%20%5Bmpeg-OTspec%5D%20SVGZ%20in%20SVG%2BOpenType> > • Reply to group > <mailto:mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5BOpenType%5D%20Re%3A%20%5Bmpeg-OTspec%5D%20SVGZ%20in%20SVG%2BOpenType> > • Start a New Topic > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mpeg-OTspec/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=X3oDMTJmdjA0cXVyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyODYwOTU1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNjAzMDM4OQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzE0MTY1ODg5Mzg-> > • Messages in this topic > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mpeg-OTspec/conversations/topics/1241;_ylc=X3oDMTM1OGU0Ym9tBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyODYwOTU1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNjAzMDM4OQRtc2dJZAMxMjYxBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQxNjU4ODkzOAR0cGNJZAMxMjQx> > (9) > > Visit Your Group > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mpeg-OTspec/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmNmVqODdmBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyODYwOTU1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNjAzMDM4OQRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MTY1ODg5Mzg-> > > > Yahoo! Groups > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaHJrcTVkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyODYwOTU1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNjAzMDM4OQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQxNjU4ODkzOA--> > > • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • > Unsubscribe > <mailto:mpeg-OTspec-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms > of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> > > . > > __,_._,___ -- behdad http://behdad.org/
Received on Friday, 21 November 2014 20:47:15 UTC