Re: Explicit WOFF metadata format declaration?

On 18 Nov 2010, at 17:52, Chris Lilley wrote:

> On Thursday, November 18, 2010, 4:36:48 PM, Laurence wrote:
> 
> LP> Is there any merit in the idea of a 'format' attribute in the root <metadata> element?
> 
> LP> I ask because it seems likely that WOFF XML metadata will find
> LP> itself sometimes separated from the WOFF files for which it is
> LP> intended. For example, XML may be exported from an editor before
> LP> being imported into a WOFF font via sfnt2woff; or font vendors may
> LP> use an XML template file, which has some of its contents replaced
> LP> programmatically before being embedded into a WOFF. In such cases
> LP> it  seems beneficial to identify the XML, unambiguously, as WOFF
> LP> metadata. The generic <metadata> tag is insufficient for this.
> 
> Fair point, and I would not be opposed to adding @format to the metadata element.
> 
> LP> If this proposal is attractive, I propose the standard value
> LP> "font/woff" for the format attribute. It would be a MAY not a MUST in the spec, of course.
> 
> Please see discussions on media type at the Lyon f2f meeting. In the end we decided to go with application/font-woff because past experience showed that attempting to registera font top level type would encounter significant resistance at IANA.

I gladly defer to you on this.

- L

Received on Friday, 19 November 2010 03:11:36 UTC