On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:14 AM, David Kuettel <kuettel@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Levantovsky, Vladimir < > Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com> wrote: > >> We can definitely revisit the list of known tables and see if anything >> there could be eliminated / swapped for 'meta' tag, but for all intent and >> purposes the list has nothing to do with how compression is applied, it >> only helps to save some bytes by reducing the size of the table directory. >> >> Any arbitrary table that is not "known" would be represented in the >> table directory by the 'arbitrary' flag followed by the table tag, the >> table data itself will be a part of the compressed data stream regardless >> of whether it's known or not. >> > > It would be great to actually measure this for a font with a 'meta' table, > just to have the hard data. Any volunteers? > I believe we know the difference to be < 4 bytes, no? > >> Thank you, >> Vlad >> >> >> On May 28, 2015, at 7:29 PM, "Sergey Malkin" <sergeym@microsoft.com> >> wrote: >> >> Apple defines ‘meta’ table that is still outside of OpenType spec. It >> contains information about languages font supports and designed for. We in >> Windows 10 decided to add this table to our system fonts and are in process >> of doing so. >> >> >> >> I noticed that this table is not in the list of known table tags ( >> http://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF2/#table_dir_format) and this may be the only >> real world table that is not compressed by this mechanism. Can we consider >> adding this table to the list? I know that list is currently full, but >> maybe we can replace some rarely used table with it? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Sergey >> >> >> >> >> >> >
Received on Friday, 29 May 2015 17:19:10 UTC