- From: Garret Rieger <grieger@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 May 2020 11:54:07 -0700
- To: "w3c-webfonts-wg (public-webfonts-wg@w3.org)" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2020 18:54:40 UTC
I re-ran the simulation with the monotype provided fonts using the adobe data set sequences. Results are attached. Performance is similar to the previously released results, however for these fonts the incxfer strategies are less efficient (165% size of optimal vs 120% of optimal), but still transfer far less bytes then unicode range and whole fonts. Similar to the last results the incxfer strategies have lower overall cost on most connections and lose to unicode range/whole font on very slow high RTT connections.
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2020 18:54:40 UTC