- From: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:42:00 +0000
- To: "w3c-webfonts-wg (public-webfonts-wg@w3.org)" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <79E5B05BFEBAF5418BCB714B43F4419937415631@wob-mail-01>
Online at http://www.w3.org/2014/04/30-webfonts-minutes.html
and as plain text below:
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WebFonts Working Group Teleconference
30 Apr 2014
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2014/04/30-webfonts-irc
Attendees
Present
raph, Vlad (+sergeym on the IRC)
Regrets
John_H., Jonathan_K.
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
Vlad
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]DSIG removal
* [5]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
<trackbot> Date: 30 April 2014
Sergei, do you have any comments on the WD and/or on the topics
for today's discussion?
<sergeym> Nothing
DSIG removal
Agreement to recommend the removal of the DSIG table when a
font is compressed by the WOFF2 encoder, remove it from the
known table tags list, explain why the table would be
invalidated by the WOFF2 process.
<sergeym> Would any UA reject the font based on invalid
signature?
<sergeym> (if it is left in the font after all)
I am not sure about existing UA but it may be an issue if the
font is misused. If a font stays as a local UA resource - I
don't think it matters one way or another but it will
definitely make webfont smaller / 5-6K lighter for download.
On bit 11 of the 'head' table flags - agreement to recommend
setting the bit when a font is pre-processed by the WOFF2
encoder. We will also submit a comment to ISO recommending
changes in the description of that bit.
Vlad is traveling next week, we will skip the next telcon on
May 7 and resume on May 14.
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 14:42:26 UTC