- From: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 18:26:15 -0400
- To: "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org Group" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <7534F85A589E654EB1E44E5CFDC19E3D0BD562AB6F@wob-email-01.agfamonotype.org>
http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-minutes.html
and below as plain text:
WebFonts Working Group Teleconference
16 Mar 2011
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-irc
Attendees
Present
+1.443.895.aaaa, [Microsoft], ChrisL, +1.250.247.aabb, tal,
+1.781.970.aacc, Vlad, +1.408.536.aadd, cslye
Regrets
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
cslye
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]SVG and CSS recap
2. [5]Last Callcomments
3. [6]Promoting to CR
4. [7]Test Suite Tools
* [8]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 16 March 2011
<Vlad> aacc is Vlad
<erik> Neither Paris nor London Zakim numbers accept my code. I'll
just read IRC.
I will attempt to take minutes
<ChrisL> I think a presence at TypeCon would be good.
<ChrisL> scribenick: cslye
Vlad: Should we have F2F at TypeCon?
TypeCon is early July in New Orleans.
ChrisL: Lots of things to discuss; seems like a good fit to do it
there.
<ChrisL> Could discuss the test results and implementations, we
could exit the meeting with an implementation report
Vlad: Will two implementations be ready by then?
<ChrisL> Opera11.10 has WOFF now
Vlad: If we go to CR, then we'll have two months to collect
implementation info, etc.
... Timing-wise it would work.
<ChrisL> [9]http://www.typecon.com/
[9] http://www.typecon.com/
Vlad: If timing and travel is convenient for people... conference
space might be smaller, but it should be fine.
<ChrisL> Royal Sonesta Hotel, New Orleans
<ChrisL> +1 for a meeting,for me
Just lost my phone connection.... back in a minute. (someone cover?)
Vlad: Straw poll says the group is in favor of it.
SVG and CSS recap
ChrisL: SVG2 will mandate WOFF.
... My proposal was to mandate WOFF, all else optional.
Other proposal was a subset of SVG fonts.
ChrisL: Describes lack of enthusiasm for SVG font mandate.
cslye: Recaps CSS3 Fonts F2F in Mountain View.
Very minimal discuss of WOFF SOR at the F2F.
Vlad: Keep SOR info as-is for now.
Last Callcomments
<ChrisL> [10]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html
[10] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html
Vlad: Lets look at comment with no action assigned.
... Issue #11 - Use of attributes for human readable text
<ChrisL>
[11]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-11
[11] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-11
Vlad: Working group believes we don't need changes.
<ChrisL> ACTION: chris to respond on issue-11 [recorded in
[12]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-78 - Respond on issue-11 [on Chris Lilley
- due 2011-03-23].
Vlad: Issue #18
[13]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-18
[13] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-18
license element text subelements
tal: Was Vlad going to contemplate legal implications?
... Most previous discussion was on a call.
Vlad: Would be in Dec 8 minutes.
This one needs more discussion, skipping for now.
<ChrisL>
[14]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-19
[14] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-19
Waiting for more input from Bert.
<ChrisL> I willsend a reminder we are waiting for is input
ChrisL: I will remind him right now.
#21 should be marked as closed/accept.
[15]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-24
[15] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-24
Awaiting clarification from Bert.
Vlad: Same for #25
[16]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-25
[16] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-25
<ChrisL> vlad: alignment makes implementation easier and faster
<scribe> ACTION: ChrisL to respond on issue-25 [recorded in
[17]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-79 - Respond on issue-25 [on Chris Lilley
- due 2011-03-23].
[18]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-26
[18] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-26
ChrisL: Thinks Bert has it the wrong way 'round.
... Response is: Just use existing DSIG.
<ChrisL> OpenType has a DSIG table already and it round trips just
fine
<scribe> ACTION: ChrisL to respond on issue-26 [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-80 - Respond on issue-26 [on Chris Lilley
- due 2011-03-23].
[20]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-34
[20] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/DoC/issues-lc-2010.html#issue-34
Some fields in OT header are not mentioned in WOFF spec
<ChrisL>
[21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-font/2011JanMar/0005.htm
l
[21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-font/2011JanMar/0005.html
<ChrisL> searchRange, entrySelector, and rangeShift
<ChrisL> sergeym: They are calculated from number of tables in the
font, so WOFF unpacking code can restore them unambiguously.
However, I think WOFF spec should mentioned them in two places.
First, it has to reference OpenType spec for calculation algorithm.
And second, conformance requirements have to mention that these
fields should be correct in original font to ensure complete
roundtrip.
Vlad: I don't see how this is handled in the WOFF spec.
tal: Yes, we just have to mention it.
If they are regenerated, WOFF should mention this.
Vlad: And provide a reference to the OT spec.
<ChrisL> trackbot, status
<scribe> ACTION: Jonathan to provide link for issue-34 [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-81 - Provide link for issue-34 [on
Jonathan Kew - due 2011-03-23].
cslye will get response on Action-57.
Vlad: Keeping Action-62 open.
[23]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/open
[23] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/open
Vlad: Keep 74 open.
... Keep 76 open.
... I will check with Apple on this one.
Promoting to CR
ChrisL: As soon as all Last Call comments have been resolved or can
be explained.
Vlad: Can make decision in April.
Test Suite Tools
tal: We can provide a font AND a script that will ensure everything
runs and passes as expected.
Vlad: Will the script be generic?
tal: No, will be specialized for each test.
... Will know what to check for and can report pass/fail.
Vlad: Would be useful to include a reference decoder.
... Make it easier for encoder developers.
... Put it on a server so the decoder can run there.
tal: Decoder lives on a server? Foundries wouldn't like that.
Vlad: Not what I'm proposing...
... Decoder doesn't give you the font back, just reports on result.
tal: I will think about that.
... That's it. Will add what Sergey mentioned.
Vlad: We are lucky to have Tal!
John: The FAQ is almost ready to go. Will check in with Chris.
Vlad: I will be traveling in Europe next week. Probably can't be on
call.
... I will decide early next week and send an email.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: chris to respond on issue-11 [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: ChrisL to respond on issue-25 [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: ChrisL to respond on issue-26 [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Jonathan to provide link for issue-34 [recorded in
[27]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action04]
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Received on Friday, 18 March 2011 22:26:47 UTC