- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 17:01:56 +0200
- To: public-webfonts-wg@w3.org
Hello public-webfonts-wg,
Minutes available at
http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html
and below as text for tracker
WebFonts Working Group Teleconference
15 Jun 2011
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-wg/2011Jun/0019.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-irc
Attendees
Present
Tal, Vlad, Erik, Christopher, Sergey, Chris, Jonathan,
JDaggett
Regrets
Chair
Vlad
Scribe
ChrisL
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]CSS WG report on @font-face
2. [6]WOFF edits
3. [7]referencing html5
4. [8]f2f
* [9]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 15 June 2011
<scribe> ScribeNick: ChrisL
<jdaggett> hmm, zakim is not happy?
why is zakim not happy?
<jdaggett> not seeing those on the phone...
<Vlad> trackbot, start telcon
<trackbot> Meeting: WebFonts Working Group Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 15 June 2011
zakim appears to not recognise anyones phone numbers today
Vlad: lets review the resent edits. also, hear from CSS WG attendees
on CSS3 fonts
<jdaggett>
[10]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jun/0329.html
[10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jun/0329.html
jdaggett: here are the minutes. lots of tangential discussion, Bert
complained its http-centric and so on
... at least the method of restriction is http-centric. but really
that is an issue with ftp etc not with our spec
... all the implementors seem ok with it already
... not clear if SOR at risk is enouh to move forward
... peter Linss suggested it was not CSS WG problem but WebFonts WG
problem
... but it elongs where @font-face is defined
Vlad: it started here but was proposed to apply to all font formats
... read the minute sand there was no clear decision
jdaggett: problem was tangential discussions
... Bert did not propose a credible alternative and it did not seem
relevant
... implementors agree some form of SOR is a good thing
Vlad: discussed this with him at AC meeting and Bert agreed at the
time
... and agreed fonts not reallyy like images, in the minutes
CSS WG report on @font-face
jdaggett: its a big rathole
... Bert always seems to say EOT is better and so on
Vlad: any specific objections?
jdaggett: no, just diffuse discussion. Florian from Opera said
current wording was acceptable
... depends if wording is good enough for CR
Vlad: clear its better to SOR based on the font link in @font-face
jdaggett: Peter's point was tha CSS WG should not decide but its
part of te @font-face mechanism. He wanted someone else to solve it
somewhere
... if that mechansm happens to cover things other than fonts then
good but we dont have consensus on that
... any way we can pre-flight the wording?
ChrisL: will ask PLH
Vlad: note the concern that this could delay CSS3 Fonts
... can we facilitate that decision?
ChrisL: we can send a liaison saying we want to depend on that
feature
jdaggett: we don't really have any strong objections at this point
Vlad: what is Google's position, do we know?
jdaggett: Tab was involved but not at this meeting. Unclear
Vlad: Tab said it was easy to implement in webkit
jdaggett: needs negotiation between webkit committors
Vlad: Apple objection seems to be resolved
jdaggett: FF and IE implemented as CSS3 Fonts says
<scribe> ACTION: Vlad to send a liaison to CSS saying that we have a
consensus that this feature is best in CSS3 Fonts module and want to
see t accepted there so we can reference it [recorded in
[11]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-93 - Send a liaison to CSS saying that we
have a consensus that this feature is best in CSS3 Fonts module and
want to see t accepted there so we can reference it [on Vladimir
Levantovsky - due 2011-06-22].
Vlad: consesnus of font vendors and impleentors
jdaggett; sounds reasonable
WOFF edits
jfkthame: set some actions pending
[12]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/pendingreview
[12] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/pendingreview
jfkthame: removed summary of conformance requirements and relocated
notes as discussed
ChrisL: reminded commmentors this was done
Relocate text describing div and span was done, too
Move BCP47 to normative and change are expected to to SHOULD
jfkthame: became a normative reference and language updated
Add expected children of all metadata elements
jfkthame: had a go at that, not clrear how much detail to go into.
ChrisL: text element is missing the same form of description as the
rest
jfkthame: seems easy
action jfkthame to add text element descrition
<trackbot> Created ACTION-94 - Add text element descrition [on
Jonathan Kew - due 2011-06-22].
ChrisL: we missed impleenting the comment from Eric Muller, to add
@url to text inside license
[13]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-8
[13] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-8
Vlad: legl folks font like a license that is different in different
languages as the least restrictive one becomes the agreement
ChrisL: ... so we decided not to add the per language links?
Vlad: one link points to a page which can be a landing page with
further links to multiple languages. its up to the font vendor to do
that
cslye: what Vlad describes is how Adobe would do it too
... so that is fine for me
... would not watnt to limit what other people expect t be there
Vlad: its a license description not a full license. it says how to
get it
cslye: ok
ChrisL; ok so the spec is good as it stands ad I will update the DoC
jfkthame: another minor edit was to requie xml to be utf-8 as
discssed on the list
... makes life simpler
ChrisL: seemed to be broad agreement on that
... need to mark up the testable assertion and add a test for it
tal: there is an existing test for utf-8 or utf-16 so that is easy
to change
<scribe> ACTION: tal to modify the test for xml encoding [recorded
in [14]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-95 - Modify the test for xml encoding [on
Tal Leming - due 2011-06-22].
[15]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-16
[15] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-16
jfkthame: yes we alked about that
action jfkthame to add the non-normative wording from richard ishida
about droppingOT tables
<trackbot> Created ACTION-96 - Add the non-normative wording from
richard ishida about droppingOT tables [on Jonathan Kew - due
2011-06-22].
[16]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-31
[16] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-31
Note:
The id attribute of the uniqueid element, and of several further
metadata elements defined below, is not of type ID. Its form is
at the discretion of the font creator or vendor.
<scribe> ACTION: jfkthame: to add the resised wording on @id
[recorded in
[17]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-97 - Add the resised wording on @id [on
Jonathan Kew - due 2011-06-22].
Vlad: so its fixing bgs n how text shows up
jfkthame: same for filenames. there is a limit
ChrisL: (describes 3 options)
jfkthame: there are unicode controls for directionality that could
be used if needed
Vlad: fine with the third option
jfkthame: option 2 would be much more complex. just not worth it
<scribe> ACTION: ChrisL to propose the third option [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-98 - Propose the third option [on Chris
Lilley - due 2011-06-22].
ChrisL: aparet from the above the edits are all good
referencing html5
<jdaggett> yup
<jdaggett> ChrisL: we lost you...
<Vlad> Chris, we lost you on the phone
(scribe got disconnected)
<scribe> ACTION: ChrisL to respond to Glenn [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - Respond to Glenn [on Chris Lilley -
due 2011-06-22].
f2f
tal: f2f to discuss test suite?
Vlad: low response to typecon suggstion
... what about atypi in september? or tpac in november
<jdaggett> atypi is in iceland?
cslye: will be at atypi
sergeym: not sure but more likely if we have a f2f
tal: sure
Vlad: will be and definitely if f2f
ChrisL: could be there
jdaggett: regrets during september
14-18 Sept, Rekjavik Iceland
<cslye> [20]http://www.atypi.org/2011-reykjavik
[20] http://www.atypi.org/2011-reykjavik
12-12 are tutorials
adjourned
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: ChrisL to propose the third option [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: ChrisL to respond to Glenn [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: jfkthame: to add the resised wording on @id [recorded
in [23]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: tal to modify the test for xml encoding [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-webfonts-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Vlad to send a liaison to CSS saying that we have a
consensus that this feature is best in CSS3 Fonts module and want to
see t accepted there so we can reference it [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-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, 15 June 2011 15:02:04 UTC