W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: WOFF and extended metadata

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 13:58:18 -0700 (PDT)
To: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
Cc: Vladimir Levantovsky <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>, Adam Langley <agl@google.com>, robert@ocallahan.org, Christopher Slye <cslye@adobe.com>, www-font@w3.org, public-webfonts-wg@w3.org, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@googlemail.com>
Message-ID: <1931859357.233161.1274389098275.JavaMail.root@cm-mail03.mozilla.org>
John Hudson wrote:

> Jonathan Kew wrote:
> > Just as image viewers can reasonably be expected to display a JPEG
> > even if the EXIF data is junk - provided the file is structurally
> > sound so that the actual image data can be interpreted - so also UAs
> > should proceed to render fonts even if the metadata is junk,
> > provided the file is structurally sound.
> I think that is reasonable, so long as the metadata is simply ignored.
> What I would like to avoid is any situation in which the UA strips the
> metadata.

I'm not at all clear on what "stripping" the metadata means here.  After
a WOFF file is downloaded, the user agent reconstitutes the font data,
activates it and uses the font.  The metadata, well-formed or not, is
not involved.  When a user wants to view font data, the user agent looks
at the metadata and displays it or displays an error noting that it's
not well-formed. 


John Daggett
Received on Thursday, 20 May 2010 20:58:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:37:34 UTC