- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 16:51:15 +0000
- To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>, "Tal Leming" <tal@typesupply.com>
- CC: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@googlemail.com>, Christopher Slye <cslye@adobe.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>, "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
> From: public-webfonts-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-webfonts-wg- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Levantovsky, Vladimir > I don't think the intention is to lock down the metadata spec and > *never* add new elements - I'd say that specifying the metadata > extension mechanism will significantly reduce the need to rev the spec > just to add new metadata, but we still can do it if and when the needs > arise. To clarify: my ideal expectation is that if we define a metadata format it will rev no more often than the binary format it describes i.e. if you tell me that WOFF 1.1, 1.2 or 2.0 are going to 90% or worse, 100% metadata schema updates then this certainly makes generic XML rendering much more attractive as a solution for us. I don't thing browser vendors want to fix font metadata rendering code in every other release. I'd rather open it up just enough that locking the schema down until the next spec is not going to be an impediment in most cases, all the while keeping it so simple that browsers who provide the feature find it trivial to render all the data.
Received on Friday, 28 May 2010 16:51:51 UTC