- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 17:29:43 +0200
- To: WebFonts WG <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
Hello,
I reconstructed some minutes based on my local IRC client log. The list
of attendees may not be complete, its from memory and mentions on IRC.
http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/2014-09-16_minutes.html
and the plain text version to feed to trackbot
Barcelona f2f
16 Sep 2014
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-wg/2014Sep/0020.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2014/09/16-webfonts-irc
Attendees
Present
Vlad, David (kuettel), Kenji (kbx), nyshadh, RSheeter,
sergeym (on phone), Behedad
Regrets
Raph, Jonathan, John Hudson
Chair
Vlad
Scribe
ChrisLilley, kbx, kuettel
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Actions roundup
2. [6]pending review actions
3. [7]W3C Process
4. [8]Conformance Test Suite
5. [9]afternoon (post4pm) discussions. File format
conformance
* [10]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
<ChrisLilley> ScribeNick: ChrisLilley
Actions roundup
[11]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/open
[11] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/open
<Vlad> Open action items:
[12]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/open
[12] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/open
<Vlad> actions pending review:
[13]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/pendingreview
[13] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/pendingreview
action-166 mobile perf
Vlad: useful but not critical
kuettel: chrome on android is using woff2 without issue
kenji: several metrics, such as when font cant be used, was 30%
... now its 25% and its mostly because of woff2 as well as some
other optimisations.
... also a metric for how long to display the text. was 630ms
now 400ms so woff2 has improved things
... compared to woff1
... data is sent from chrome users who agree t send stats.
these are from chrome 35
... compared to chrome 37 with woff2
rod: there was an issue about higher battery life
kuettel: prefer to keep this action open as we add more data
kenji: memory might be tricky, needs more analysis
action-122?
<trackbot> action-122 -- Raph Levien to Investigate the TTC
support as part of the WOFF 2.0 pre-processing mechanism -- due
2013-10-30 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [14]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/122
[14] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/122
trackbot, status
(suggests adding Kenji as he is missing from trackbot users)
kuettel: was not clear what we decided earlier. css webfonts
does not support ttc
behedad: its in the CSS3 spec but not implemented
kuettel: raph had suggested a way but it was not prototyped
Vlad: adobe has been active to extend TTC to OT collection with
CFF fonts
... so guessing they see it as important
kuettel: christopher slye had been contacted to see if adobe
was interested.
Vlad: christoopher stepped down, Adobe have another rep now
(wg members
[15]https://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=44556 )
[15] https://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=44556
kuettel: so we could prototype
rod: sure, could look at that. what was raph's suggestion?
kuettel: look at scope of changes, then consult with behedad
and raph
... should not change wire format
(re-assigned to Rod with target 31 oct)
actoion-129?
action-129?
<trackbot> action-129 -- David Kuettel to Prepare a mime type
application draft and justification for top-level "font"
registration (with Vlad) -- due 2014-02-05 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [16]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/129
[16] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/129
kuettel: takes a long time, is not blocking
Vlad: as with woff1 we will register in application subtree
... spoke to some folks involved, and they said unless there is
very compelling explanation for a separate top level type, then
it will not be accepted
... but it is at least possible now
kuettel: target date Jan 31 2015
action-132?
<trackbot> action-132 -- David Kuettel to Track progress of
Brotli specification to RFC -- due 2014-09-10 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [17]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/132
[17] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/132
zoltan says spec has been sent as ID, needs feedback, WG could
help for review
action chrisl to use ietf-w3c liaison to get review and
guidance for next steps on Brotli ID
<trackbot> Created ACTION-146 - Use ietf-w3c liaison to get
review and guidance for next steps on brotli id [on Chris
Lilley - due 2014-09-23].
kuettel: compression team thrilled to see brotli picked up and
deployed in browsers
action-133?
<trackbot> action-133 -- Raph Levien to Review the spec edits
and finalize the definition of the "nominal size" -- due
2014-08-20 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [18]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/133
[18] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/133
Vlad: raph still intends to clarify this, by early october
... critical, as little benefit and hard to implement
... not enough info for decoder to allocate memory with
confidence
ChrisLilley: agree, its not like woff1 which had a guarantee
due to bitwise identical, not the case here
Vlad: alternative is to specify an exact implementation but
that constrains implementation
rod: its clear ppl have to manage memory themselves
Vlad: goal with mtx was optimal decompression
... original size may be a good estimate of required size but
is not a guarantee
... keep action on raph
action-138?
<trackbot> action-138 -- Vladimir Levantovsky to Review
conformance statements for woff 1.0 and transfer the applicable
ones over -- due 2014-09-17 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/138
[19] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/138
Vlad: sent an email
[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-wg/2014
Sep/0016.html
[20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-wg/2014Sep/0016.html
Vlad: in woff1, we tried to reproduce same structure as sfnt so
table directory was fixed size and padded. each table reference
was uncompressed or separately compressed, and 4byte aligned,
and end padded
... in woff2 alltable directory entires variable length, very
small, one byte of flags plus up to 5 bytes of size, so padding
removes that benefit
... thus anything about byte alignment and padding is not
applicable
... so must parse whole set of enties for find where compressed
stream starts
... table is not parsed until after header is decompressed. in
multithread you conld decompress in anther thread
behedad: its such a small bit of data, not worth optimising for
... its like 20 bytes
Vlad: we have two byte reserved, not sure why
ChrisLilley: think it was for padding only
Vlad: could use them to hold table offset
behedad: require it to be zero for later expansion
Vlad: already discussed, file format requires zero but ua not
required to fail on non-zero
behedad: first, throwing away an extension opportunity, and
introduce twqo ways to compute same thing so you get platform
variabilities. dont like the redundancy
... currently done by computing the offset by counting
ChrisLilley: could see that as a potential exploit
behedad: its using it as a cache, like TT did, with bad results
Vlad: already updated the spec to see what the wordin would
look like
... added para that says it is different to sfnt; reflect exact
order in compressed font stream
... theis was implied but not directly stated
ChrisLilley: good catch
close action-138
<trackbot> Closed action-138.
keep things as-is
action-143?
<trackbot> action-143 -- Vladimir Levantovsky to Update the
spec in regards to the bug -- due 2014-09-17 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/143
[21] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/143
Vlad: in woff 1 there were some useful notes that could be
copied over
... all the checksums are screwed up, I realised
... due to transforms. spec is silent thatthese need to be
recomputed
kuettel: google implementation is recomputing the checksums
already
Vlad: keep 143 open for now. used to have a definition of
transformed glyph header, and assumed sequence of compressed
data streams. so needs entire transformed glyph sequence
explicitly spelled out
... so edit spec to clarify sequence of data fields
this relates to action-144
pending review actions
[22]https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/pendingreview
[22] https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/pendingreview
these are all reflected in the latests spec. so unless you saw
an issue in the spec, they are done
action-140 causes a change in the google implementation
kuettel: we need to update for that
... we need to test that change
close action-125
<trackbot> Closed action-125.
action-126
<trackbot> action-126 -- David Kuettel to Check publication of
security review -- due 2014-01-15 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/126
[23] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/126
kenji: fuzzer was used to make bad data, look for crashes.
fixed, especially if it could be exploited. fuzzer is silent at
this point. still running, but so far not found
close action-128
<trackbot> Closed action-128.
ChrisLilley: not enough svg in OT to form real conclusions
close action-126
<trackbot> Closed action-126.
kuettel: brotli is very good for general text not just fonts.
works well on html and xml
behedad: suggested svgz in svg table, more for non-web use. but
its redundant to gzip the svg and the brotli
Vlad: OT spec doesn't allow for gzip compressed svg
behedad: its part of the svg spec itself
Vlad: reasonable to allow either.
... for woff case it may be better to unzip and then brotli it
... ISO spec under final review, so not much time for comments
ChrisLilley: so its DIS now?
... changes are suggested bot blocking
(we will not require any SVG pre-processing)
[24]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#Metadata
[24] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#Metadata
close action-131
<trackbot> Closed action-131.
action-134?
<trackbot> action-134 -- Vladimir Levantovsky to - edit the
spec to reflect the recommended changes -- due 2014-09-10 --
PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/134
[25] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/134
see
[26]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-wg/2014
Sep/0019.html
[26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-wg/2014Sep/0019.html
close action-134
<trackbot> Closed action-134.
action-135?
<trackbot> action-135 -- Roderick Sheeter to Check the current
reference iomplementation to see what is currently implemented
-- due 2014-09-10 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [27]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/135
[27] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/135
Vlad: can test with a special font that could trigger multiple
encodings of same value
close action-135
<trackbot> Closed action-135.
action-136?
<trackbot> action-136 -- Vladimir Levantovsky to - edit the
woff2 uintbase128 description to eliminate possible multiple
encoded values and specify that any error conditions must
invalidate the font file -- due 2014-09-10 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [28]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/136
[28] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/136
close action-136
<trackbot> Closed action-136.
action-137?
<trackbot> action-137 -- Chris Lilley to Edit the spec and
implement the changes we agreed to during this call (see
minutes on sep. 3, 2014) -- due 2014-09-10 -- CLOSED
<trackbot> [29]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/137
[29] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/137
Vlad: now says what we discuswd, FF requires zero, AT must
accept any
close action-137
<trackbot> Closed action-137.
close action-138
<trackbot> Closed action-138.
action-139?
<trackbot> action-139 -- Vladimir Levantovsky to Update the
disg wording per chris's recommendations (to always remove the
table) -- due 2014-09-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [30]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/139
[30] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/139
Vlad: older windows used dsig to set the icon on the font
behedad: word only allows OT features if font has DSIG
<Vlad> sergey, are you there
sergeym, are you there?
Vlad: sergey checked and no impls rely on dsig, onlyolder
windows version to select appropriate icon
<sergeym> I'm out of batery on my phone. Will call back as sson
as possible
Vlad: we dedided that making an empty DSIG had no value.
Jonathan suggested removing it
... discussing dsig changes, concern over empty DSIG table
... can you confirm no apps rely on DSIG?
... older Word versions to enable OT features?
sergeym: they do not depend on DSIG, they rely on cff vs TT
Vlad: so we required encoder to remove dsig
behedad: is decoder required to reject if DSIG present?
Vlad: no
behedad: ok
close action-139
<trackbot> Closed action-139.
action-140?
<trackbot> action-140 -- Vladimir Levantovsky to The woff 2.0
encoders must also set bit 11 of the 'flags' field -- due
2014-09-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [31]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/140
[31] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/140
Vlad: indicates font is preprocessed, in line with OT spec
close action-140
<trackbot> Closed action-140.
action-141?
<trackbot> action-141 -- Vladimir Levantovsky to Add a
normative statement in the loca table section (to firm up) --
due 2014-09-17 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [32]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/141
[32] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/141
Vlad: stores glyph offsets
... in loca table, look in header for the values
close action-141
<trackbot> Closed action-141.
action-142
<trackbot> action-142 -- Vladimir Levantovsky to Update spec to
require bounding box presence -- due 2014-09-17 --
PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> [33]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/142
[33] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/142
Vlad: requires explicit bbox. was already case, adeed
conformance requiremrent as UA and FF.
close action-142
<trackbot> Closed action-142.
Vlad: google impl always drops bbox from simple glyph. ok if
control points always on extrema
behedad: spec is not clear if they are not extrema points. best
to have bbbox of hull of all listed coordinates
Vlad: (example where bbox is larger than the points)
... spec says that if bbox cannot be calcuilated from coord
data, do not drop it
behedad: impls do not do a tight ink bbox, they do the bbox of
all on- and 0ff-curve points]
... spec needs to say that
kbx: should we display warning if not?
... is it a minor case?
Vlad: claim was that google drops all bboxes
kbx: can we show its uncommon
behedad: fontforge until recently did geometric bbox and
truncating it, so they were all off
... but dropping is harmless, shifts by one unit
kbx: we could instrument chrome to see if this shows up
behedad: only reason there is this part of spec, is to
accomodate fonts that are not correctly constructed
Vlad: but tt spec does not require correctness here
behedad: has beemn misinterpreted over time
ChrisLilley: possible to construct one where the glyph is
clipped away
Vlad: (quotes, best if xmin is left side bearing) but not
required
behedad: bt that refers to value from hmtx table
[34]http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otspec/hmtx.htm
[34] http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otspec/hmtx.htm
behedad: min and max of all coordinates (on and off)
<scribe> ACTION: vlad to update spec for bbox dropping
criteria, min max of all coordinates [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action01
]
[35] http://www.w3.org/2014/09/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action01
<trackbot> Created ACTION-147 - Update spec for bbox dropping
criteria, min max of all coordinates [on Vladimir Levantovsky -
due 2014-09-23].
behedad: google impl normalizes and recomputes the bbox so a
bad bbox never makes it through
<kbx> I'm back
<scribe> scribenick: kbx
W3C Process
Chris talking about the new process at w3c re last call /
candidate recommendation
there used to be last call followed to CR.
problem is that if you made changes after last call, there
could be some issues.
now the 2 stages are combined.
you can make changes. Major changes trigger another patent
exclusion.
For 2 years, we can use the old approach or the new approach.
After that it's only the new approach.
We need to decide which one.
We should also try to make a decision to go to last call and if
needed determine what are the blocking items to get there.
<Vlad> sergey, are you ready to call in?
<ChrisLilley> faq
[36]https://www.w3.org/wiki/ProcessTransition2014
[36] https://www.w3.org/wiki/ProcessTransition2014
Vlad suggesting we go to last call as soon as the action items
are closed.
in short, the old way seems more practical at this point.
open question about rejecting on invalid checksum
Chris / David: what did Woff 1 do in that case?
Vlad / Behdad: it should be a note, there doesn't seem to be
any rendering engine that actually care about the checksum
Conformance test Suite
Vlad: would like to look at the different statement and outline
a plan on how this could be tested
<ChrisLilley>
[37]https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan20-UserAgent
[37] https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan20-UserAgent
<ChrisLilley>
[38]https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan20-Format
[38] https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan20-Format
<ChrisLilley>
[39]https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan20-AuthoringTool
[39] https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan20-AuthoringTool
action vlad review and edit the conformance test for extraneous
data
<trackbot> Created ACTION-148 - Review and edit the conformance
test for extraneous data [on Vladimir Levantovsky - due
2014-09-23].
Chris: for uintbase128, need to hex edit the fonts as it
probably would not be easy to produce all the specimen from
regular authoring tools
Vlad: mustAccept255UInt16 is just a matter of producing the
specimen fonts (3 possible encodings) and testing those.
Chris is editing the wiki
mustRejectInvalidUintBase128
is also doable, Chris is editing the wiki.
mustNotUseReservedValue is also easy, Chris is editing the wiki
with the approach.
mustBeInvalidated-FailDecompress: a valid font, a corrupted
font, a woff 2 font with gzip stream (see wiki for additional
details)
mustBeInvalidated-FailSize: start from valid fonts and modify
lengths (wiki edited)
boundingbox requirement should probably just be "MUST be
calculated" instead of "MUST be calculated at the time of
decoding" (so that UA have more freedom in terms of potential
optimizations)
mustCalculateBBox: should be tested with a single glyph "PASS"
font with no BBox.
Vlad: questions about a CTS for Brotli itself (input files that
must be decompressed or failing)
David: any requirements from the IETF about this aspect?
Chris: need to confirm
action ChrisLilley to check expectations regarding CTF from
IETF
<trackbot> Error finding 'ChrisLilley'. You can review and
register nicknames at
<[40]http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/users>.
[40] http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/users>.
action ChrisL to check expectations regarding CTF from IETF
<trackbot> Created ACTION-149 - Check expectations regarding
ctf from ietf [on Chris Lilley - due 2014-09-23].
shouldBeShort: can't be tested but is a sound recommendation.
action vlad make private data block section clear regarding
compression
<trackbot> Created ACTION-150 - Make private data block section
clear regarding compression [on Vladimir Levantovsky - due
2014-09-23].
afternoon (post4pm) discussions. File format conformance
<ChrisL> scribenick: kuettel
<Vlad> We are back from the lunch break
[41]https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan20-Format
[41] https://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan20-Format
<kuettel_>
[42]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-noextraneous
[42] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-noextraneous
<kuettel_> vlad: three potential places where extra data could
be added
<kuettel_> vlad: (1) end of header, beginning of table
directory
<kuettel_> vlad: (2) gap between end of compressed font stream
and extended metadata
<kuettel_> ACTION: vlad to change first paragraph of section 3
to remove reference to private data compression [recorded in
[43]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action02
]
[43] http://www.w3.org/2014/09/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action02
<trackbot> Created ACTION-151 - Change first paragraph of
section 3 to remove reference to private data compression [on
Vladimir Levantovsky - due 2014-09-23].
<kuettel_> (3) between extended metadata and private data
<kuettel_> (4) after private data
<kuettel_> vlad, chris: discussed whether there would be an
opportunity for an exploit around private data. e.g. someone
adds more data, but then adjusts the length such that the
browser would not reject the file. Chris, shouldn't be as just
transporting the data isn't enough -- someone would have to
have access to it, which they wouldn't
<kuettel_>
[44]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustSetReser
vedToZero
[44] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustSetReservedToZero
<kuettel_> (discussion around metadata and whether browsers
should display it, whether browsers should reject font if not
valid -- no, etc)
<kuettel_>
[45]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustUseBrotl
i-FontData
[45] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustUseBrotli-FontData
<kuettel_> (captured a test for it)
<kuettel_>
[46]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustMatchUnc
ompressedSize
[46] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustMatchUncompressedSize
<kuettel_> (captured a test for it)
<kuettel_>
[47]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustTransfor
mTables
[47] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustTransformTables
<kuettel_> (reviewing whether there should be assertions around
supporting particular font formats, e.g. CFF, or whether the
general sfnt language is sufficient)
<kuettel_> (Chris captured a test for it)
<kuettel_>
[48]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustHaveComp
ositeBBox
[48] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustHaveCompositeBBox
<kuettel_> (Chris captured a test for it)
<kuettel_>
[49]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-transformedL
ocaMustBeZero
[49] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-transformedLocaMustBeZero
<kuettel_>
[50]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-OriginalLoca
Size
[50] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-OriginalLocaSize
<kuettel_>
[51]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustTransfor
mGlyfTable
[51] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustTransformGlyfTable
<kuettel_>
[52]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-tableOrderin
g
[52] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-tableOrdering
<kuettel_>
[53]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustSpecifyG
lyfTableSize
[53] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-mustSpecifyGlyfTableSize
<kuettel_> Vlad: this could change based on what we decide to
do with nominal size
<kuettel_>
[54]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-metadataSepa
ratelyCompresssed
[54] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-metadataSeparatelyCompresssed
<kuettel_>
[55]http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-metadata-aft
erfonttable
[55] http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF2/spec/#conform-metadata-afterfonttable
<ChrisL> someone said something important and we missed it ...
Drinks! --Zaphod Beeblebrox
<RSheeter> at milliways?
<ChrisL> well, we HAVE dones six impossible things before, er,
dinner
<ChrisL> (adjourned)
<RSheeter> ChrisL, make minutes :D
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: vlad to change first paragraph of section 3 to
remove reference to private data compression [recorded in
[56]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action02
]
[NEW] ACTION: vlad to update spec for bbox dropping criteria,
min max of all coordinates [recorded in
[57]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action01
]
[56] http://www.w3.org/2014/09/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action02
[57] http://www.w3.org/2014/09/16-webfonts-minutes.html#action01
[End of minutes]
--
Best regards,
Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Monday, 22 September 2014 15:29:48 UTC