- 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