- From: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 10:39:00 -0700
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- CC: public-webfonts-wg@w3.org
On 18/10/13 10:08 AM, Chris Lilley wrote: > Thanks. So the entire TTC is an sfnt (specifically, an entire TTC can > be encoded as a single WOFF?) Excellent question. > I was previously only aware of TTC used for CJK fonts, and I > understood a typical use case to be 'mostly the same' Japanese and > Simplified Chinese fonts with distinct glyphs for those code points > where Unicode unification at the character level required different > language-specific glyphs. I may well have misunderstood, though. The TTC spec doesn't much constrain the ways in which the format can be used. Basically, any tables within the TTC can be shared or not by the fonts, which makes it very flexible. In practice, I believe name tables are currently necessarily not shared, in that these are how the individual fonts are identified. [When looking at potential mechanisms for size-specific design variation last year we did consider a form of TTC in which different size design subsets would share a name table.] JH
Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 17:39:47 UTC