W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webfonts-wg@w3.org > June 2011

Minutes, 1 June 2011 WebFonts WG call

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 17:19:00 +0200
Message-ID: <826673444.20110601171900@w3.org>
To: public-webfonts-wg@w3.org
Hello public-webfonts-wg,

Minutes of todays call at
http://www.w3.org/2011/06/01-webfonts-minutes.html

and below as text

                 WebFonts Working Group Teleconference

01 Jun 2011

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/06/01-webfonts-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Vlad, Jonathan, Christopher, John, Chris

   Regrets
          Sylvain, jdaggett, Tab

   Chair
          Vlad

   Scribe
          ChrisL

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Last Call disposition of comments
         2. [5]Open Action Items
         3. [6]Progressing to Candidate Rec
         4. [7]f2f at typecon
     * [8]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 01 June 2011

   <scribe> scribenick: ChrisL

   Vlad: want to finalise last call and agree to move to candidate rec

Last Call disposition of comments

   [9]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html

      [9] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html

   ChrisL: I18n was waiting for our specific text before agreeing. I
   sent some emails pointing to edits that had been done

   [10]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-15

     [10] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-15

   ChrisL: we agreed to more clearly indicate the content models. need
   to agre on text

   jfkthame: some new text after description of div and span element
   ... seems to address this coment. Could add expected children

   ChrisL: could add to all the elements their expected children

   [11]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-32

     [11] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-32

   [12]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-16

     [12] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-16

   [13]http://www.w3.org/International/track/issues/9

     [13] http://www.w3.org/International/track/issues/9

   "The automatic removal of OpenType features such as GPOS and GSUB
   information at any stage in the process of deploying a WOFF file is
   strongly discouraged. Many writing systems around the world rely on
   these features for very basic display of text in the script that
   they use."

   ChrisL: general guidance not conformance

   Vlad: they suggest end of section 5 for that note

   jfkthame: could add as informative note
   ... out of scope as a conformance requirement, but fine as an
   informative note

   Vlad: god to add it as a note for implementors to pay attention to

   [14]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-34

     [14] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-34

   has the edit been done for that?

   jfkthame: not sure (checks)
   ... yes it is there, section 4

   Vlad: "searchRange, entrySelector, and rangeShift" are the ones
   cited
   ... need to add normative reference

   jfkthame: yes

   Vlad: sergey wanted these as conformance requirements

   "And second, conformance requirements have to mention that these
   fields should be correct in original font to ensure complete
   roundtrip."

   [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-font/2011JanMar/0005.htm
   l

     [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-font/2011JanMar/0005.html

   We were asked to remove the sumary of conformance requirements or to
   clearly indicate they are informative

   jfkthame: what do we want to do? it was specifically requested.
   ... could clearly see its an informative summary

   Vlad: danger is that we miss keeping them in sync. prefer to drop it

   ChrisL: agree

   jfkthame: early in WG discussions we agreed to have a concie summary

   Vlad: worried that we miss something or that people only read the
   summary

   ChrisL: what about the three notes? Should they be relocated?

   ACTION jfkthame to remove Summary of Conformance Requirements,
   relocating any notes that seem valuable to keep

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-89 - Remove Summary of Conformance
   Requirements, relocating any notes that seem valuable to keep [on
   Jonathan Kew - due 2011-06-08].

   Vlad: second note is not so valuable. First and third are
   ... add third to end of section 6
   ... last one belongs in metadata section

   ChrisL: will send folow up emails informing commentors of todays
   decisions

   Vlad: ok so DoC is done, pending responses from I18n

Open Action Items

   ACTION-62: Modify spec text re. div and span in text elements

   <trackbot> ACTION-62 Modify spec text re. div and span in text
   elements notes added

   Vlad: seems logical to add to description of text element. but
   putting it before extension element i seems out of place

   ChrisL: seemed clear enouh to me

   jfkthame: how avout putting it at end after extension element

   Vlad: seems to interrupt the flow of the description

   jfkthame: arguments against several options

   Vlad: proposed in email was to append to 'may be localised' and put
   div and span right before that.

   cslye: sounds good

   Vlad: jfkthame its up to you

   jfkthame: cslye which ioption sounded good?

   <cslye> after extension element.

   Vlad: it would be fine after the extension element

   jfkthame: close and add new action

   close action-62

   <trackbot> ACTION-62 Modify spec text re. div and span in text
   elements closed

   <scribe> ACTION: jfkthame to relocate text describing div and span
   [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/01-webfonts-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-90 - Relocate text describing div and span
   [on Jonathan Kew - due 2011-06-08].

   action-74?

   <trackbot> ACTION-74 -- Chris Lilley to update disposition of
   comments -- due 2011-02-16 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [17]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/74

     [17] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/74

   ChrisL: keep open untilwe are done

   action-76?

   <trackbot> ACTION-76 -- Maciej Stachowiak to ask apple about
   proposed FO solution -- due 2011-02-23 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/76

     [18] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/76

   close action-76

   <trackbot> ACTION-76 Ask apple about proposed FO solution closed

   Vlad: apple will give resources to develop From-Origin

   action-81?

   <trackbot> ACTION-81 -- Jonathan Kew to provide link for issue-34 --
   due 2011-03-23 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/81

     [19] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/81

   this is the link to the OT spec

   for earchRange, entrySelector, and rangeShift

   jfkthame: relaod, i just commited an edit with that

   close action-81

   <trackbot> ACTION-81 Provide link for issue-34 closed

   ChrisL: can we change 'are expected to' to 'SHOULD'

   <scribe> ACTION: jfkthame to move BCP47 to normative and change are
   expected to to SHOULD [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/01-webfonts-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-91 - Move BCP47 to normative and change
   are expected to to SHOULD [on Jonathan Kew - due 2011-06-08].

   action-83?

   <trackbot> ACTION-83 -- Chris Lilley to to add div and span to RNG
   -- due 2011-04-13 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/83

     [21] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/83

   ChrisL: in progress

Progressing to Candidate Rec

   Vlad: once these edits are done and DoC up to date as agreed, can we
   agree to move to CR?

   (no objections)

   <scribe> ACTION: jfkthame to add expected children of all metadata
   elements [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/01-webfonts-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-92 - Add expected children of all metadata
   elements [on Jonathan Kew - due 2011-06-08].

   Resolved: move to Candidate Recommendation once these edits are done

f2f at typecon

   Vlad: not enouh participants for a meeting aty typecon

   <cslye> Vlad, at your convenience can you summarize who in the WG
   will be at TypeCon?

   Vlad: next steps are checking the test suite and creating an
   implementation report

   then we get to PR

   scribe: depends on CSS WG due to SOR dependency

   <John> [Sorry I'm late]

   Vlad (explains CR)

   Vlad: EPUB wants to reference WOFF so they need it to be in CR

   John: f2f?

   Vlad: few confirmed attendees and several regrets
   ... so no meeting at typecon

   adjourned

   Vlad: travel next week. Do we need a telcon?

   June 8 telcon cancelled

   John: FAQ updated?

   ChrisL: reall soon now (been ill)

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: jfkthame to add expected children of all metadata
   elements [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/01-webfonts-minutes.html#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: jfkthame to move BCP47 to normative and change are
   expected to to SHOULD [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/01-webfonts-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: jfkthame to relocate text describing div and span
   [recorded in
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/01-webfonts-minutes.html#action01]

   [End of minutes]

-- 
 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 Wednesday, 1 June 2011 15:23:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:34:15 UTC