- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 13:50:54 +0200
- To: "Cosimo Lupo" <cosimo.lupo@daltonmaag.com>, "Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com" <vladimir.levantovsky@monotype.com>
- CC: public-webfonts-wg@w3.org
Hello Cosimo, Thursday, April 16, 2015, 7:01:45 PM, you wrote: > Thank you for your reply! > As for the padding, I was not referring to the padding between > tables, but within the glyf table between each glyph entry, which in > turn is reflected in the loca offsets. > The reference implementation still "normalises" the glyf table > according to the now outdated notion of nominal size, by rounding > the glyph lengths to multiples of 4 bytes. That is no longer required, but nor is it incorrect. An implementation might choose to optimise for smallest size by not padding, or optimise for fastest access by aligning. > When it comes to > reconstructing a glyf table which was not internally padded and has > therefore has a shorter origLength, the reference decoder fails That is a bug > because the reconstructed table (with 4-byte glyph padding) doesn't > fit the encoded origLength from the third-party encoder. It is not required to fit that length. -- Best regards, Chris Lilley Technical Director, W3C Interaction Domain
Received on Friday, 17 April 2015 11:51:01 UTC