- From: Matt Colyer <matt@typekit.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 09:34:40 -0700
- To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com>
- Cc: Erik van Blokland <erik@letterror.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <g2h9fdb0b521005040934waa726e97mc557a6b28c9ea776@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:17 AM, Levantovsky, Vladimir < Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com> wrote: > Hi Erik, > > > > A short answer is – it would not affect this ability at all. > > The long answer: the proposed checksum will be calculated based on the WOFF > data including Header, Table Directory and extended and private metadata > fields, and will be set to equal the difference between the calculated value > and the checkSumAdjustment of the original font encapsulated in the WOFF as > a payload. In order for UA to verify the integrity of WOFF data it will need > to calculate the checksum for WOFF data and match its value against the > ‘checkSumAdjustment’ field of downloaded ‘head’ table (this is the only > table UA would have to download, but it would have to do it anyway, and the > table size is small). Once UA downloaded the ‘head’ table and verified the > integrity of WOFF data, the UA can proceed and download any desired > selection of specific tables, the same way that you could do it now. > I am interested to hear why a checksum is considered necessary/beneficial in WOFF. Since fonts will be served over HTTP which itself is served over TCP, the data is guaranteed not to be corrupted through transmission. -Matt *From:* Erik van Blokland [mailto:letterror@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Erik > van Blokland > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 04, 2010 4:01 AM > *To:* Levantovsky, Vladimir > *Cc:* www-font@w3.org > *Subject:* Re: WebFonts WG discussions > > > > Vlad, > > > > On 3 mei 2010, at 17:40, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote: > > > > This approach would allow user agents to verify the integrity of WOFF > data fields and match it against the font ‘checkSumAdjustment’ encoded as > part of the font ‘head’ table [3]. The suggested approach would **not** > require decompressing the whole font to calculate checksum, and would > preserve the ability of UA to selectively decompress font tables to only > retrieve portions of font data as needed. > > > > How would this checksum affect the ability of the UA to download only > specific tables? > > > > Erik >
Received on Wednesday, 5 May 2010 13:12:05 UTC