Re: Reference Compression Tool Updates: CFF, WOFF 1.0 vs. WOFF 2.0 comparisons

Thank you, David!


On May 30, 2013, at 6:14 AM, "David Kuettel" <kuettel@google.com> wrote:

> Yesterday, two changes were submitted to the Font Compression Reference project:
> https://code.google.com/p/font-compression-reference/
> 
> The first change added CFF support to the compression tools.
> Specifically, wrapping the font data in the WOFF 2.0 wrapper and
> compressing each table using LZMA.  With the CFF support in place, we
> can now gather early compression improvement numbers for CFF fonts as
> well.  Here for reference are the numbers for the Open Font Library
> (CFF) fonts:
> 
> WOFF 2.0 Compression w/ Open Font Library (CFF) fonts
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvcH1ZzSrGMGdE93elRrWWp3TXRtdUNpa01kekhtc0E#gid=0
> 
> Average: 11.28%
> Median: 11.08%
> Stdev: 3.09%
> Min: 3.85%
> Max: 25.70%
> 
> The second change updated the comparisons.  Previously the tool
> compared the compression improvement of WOFF 2.0 over GZIP.  Now the
> tool compares WOFF 1.0 and WOFF 2.0.  While the difference between
> GZIP and WOFF 1.0 small, on the order of a couple hundred bytes, the
> WOFF 1.0 vs. 2.0 comparison is more relevant to advancing the
> specification.
> 
> Thank you!
>

Received on Thursday, 30 May 2013 01:47:00 UTC