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

RE: WOFF and extended metadata

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 15:29:33 +0000
To: Tal Leming <tal@typesupply.com>
CC: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@googlemail.com>, Vladimir Levantovsky <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>, Christopher Slye <cslye@adobe.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>, "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <045A765940533D4CA4933A4A7E32597E21494BFD@TK5EX14MBXC120.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
> From: Tal Leming [mailto:tal@typesupply.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 8:19 AM


> Extensions to the metadata are allowed, but they may not be displayed
> by UAs. If extensions are added, they must not be nested any deeper
> than two levels from the top-level metadata element.

That is what I propose whether or not we agree on a metadata extension
mechanism i.e. if it's not defined in the spec, browsers may ignore it.

To be clear, I'm not concerned about nesting (even though I think little
should be needed) as much as I want to render a simple known schema vs. 
making a best-guess - i.e. crappy - rendering of any arbitrary elements 
from any random namespace. 

I thought it'd help if there was a way to add some level of extra metadata 
that would be rendered reliably across browsers. If that's not needed, I'm 
fine with just saying browsers may ignore anything the spec does not define.
I feel that we're missing out on a very simple and reliable way to add value, 
however.
Received on Thursday, 27 May 2010 15:30:09 UTC

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