On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Levantovsky, Vladimir < Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com> wrote: > In the scenario that Behdad proposed we would have to keep both the DISG > entry in table directory and the empty table as part of the font data. > Removing the DSIG table and inserting the empty DSIG table when the font is > decoded is a possible alternative option, we would only need to record the > presence of the DISG in the original file (we do have reserved flags that > can be used for this) to let the decoder know when the empty one needs to > be inserted. > Sure. But I don't see why you would want to make a DSIG exception in the file format when it essentially saves nothing (5 bytes max?). Perhaps add it back to the known-tables list. > Vlad > > On Wednesday, May 21, 2014 5:32 PM David Kuettel wrote: > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@google.com> > wrote: > > My recommendation is that the spec be changed, to recommend that if > > the original font had a DSIG table, then all signatures in the DSIG > > table be removed. Ie. an encoder is encouraged to keep an a DSIG > > table with zero signatures. That's a valid table that is only eight > > bytes. (00 00 00 01 00 > > 00 00 00). > > Interesting. So rather than removing the table all together (as the > latest draft currently recommends, http://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF2/), just > removing all of the signatures from the table if present. > > That sound great! >
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2014 22:29:13 UTC