- From: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:19:05 -0700
- To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com>, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com>, Raph Levien <raph@google.com>, "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
The discussion about recognised table tags has me wondering whether stripping of recognised tool source tables might be a reasonable preprocessing step? There are a few font tools that use the sfnt structure as a source format and store custom tables in the font; when the font is 'shipped' from these tools, the source data is compiled to standard font tables and the custom source tables are stripped. Obviously web fonts should properly be made from shipped fonts, and not from sfnt files containing source tables, and in a sane world we'd be able to rely on the makers of WOFF files and/or WOFF creation tools to ensure that this is the case. However, since these custom source tables can be of very significant size, and clearly inappropriate to include in any web font, I wonder if it would make sense to identify known source table tags in the spec as invalid for inclusion in a WOFF? Offhand, I would include the following VTT and VOLT source table tags in such a list: TSI0 TSI1 TSI2 TSI3 TSI4 TSI5 TSIV [If Microsoft can confirm the convention of beginning all custom source table names with 'TSI', we could presumably declare any such tag invalid for inclusion in a WOFF.] JH
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2014 21:20:47 UTC