- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 14:33:47 +0100
- To: Tal Leming <tal@typesupply.com>
- CC: WOFF Working Group FONT <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
On Tuesday, November 2, 2010, 6:41:30 PM, Tal wrote: TL> Hello WG, TL> I'm working on the WOFF validator and I've come across two TL> testable assertions in the spec that don't seem to square up with each other: TL> http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/spec/#conform-metadata-schemavalid >> If the extended metadata does not match this schema, it is invalid. TL> http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/spec/#conform-metadata-extensionelements >> In addition, vendors MAY include additional types of metadata as new elements within the metadata element, or as additional attributes of the elements specified here. TL> Am I missing something or are these contradicting each other? We discussed this today and yes, they were clearly contradicting each other. The second statement seems to be left over from before there was an explicit extension mechanism. TL> Should the second statement make it clear that the only way to TL> extend the metadata is with the extension element? We resolved this by deleting the second statement entirely. -- 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 Thursday, 4 November 2010 13:34:20 UTC