W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2016

Re: Proposed clarifications to the "SVG Integration" doc

From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 17:04:04 -0600
Message-ID: <CAFDDJ7w00njKub1yksZM6ta_aPQQuQJ5r1=4FSx9ezT2zvbvzg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sairus Patel <sppatel@adobe.com>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, "public-svgopentype@w3.org" <public-svgopentype@w3.org>
Cc: Bogdan Brinza <bbrinza@microsoft.com>
Hi Sairus,

I've made up an issue in our GitHub tracker for these concerns:

If you're able to create a pull request on the repo for any or all of these
concerns, that would help move things along.  If not, it will get done, but
the SVG Working Group's focus the next month is getting SVG 2 to Candidate
Recommendation status.

At a glance, your concerns all seem valid, but I haven't done a careful
review myself.  I'm copying Bogdan Brinza who was the last one to do
updates on that spec, even if he didn't add himself to the editors list.

Amelia Bellamy-Royds

On 20 May 2016 at 17:54, Sairus Patel <sppatel@adobe.com> wrote:

> Hello Cameron, Dirk, Doug (the editors of the SVG Integration document),
> all:
> I’d like to request the following changes to the SVG Integration document
> https://www.w3.org/TR/svg-integration/. This has come up in the context
> of the current revision to the OpenType-SVG specification. Please let me
> know if there is another process by which to move this along:
> 1.
> In sec 2 > font document, change:
> > must use the secure animated processing mode.
> to:
> > must use the secure animated or secure static processing mode.
> Reason: As stated in OT-SVG, it is valid for a font-engine *not* to
> support animation. Thus either mode above should be allowed.
> 2.
> In sec 2, font document, replace:
> > This referencing mode is intended to used by the OpenType specification
> for processing documents from the "SVG" table.
> by:
> > The OpenType specification uses this referencing mode for processing
> documents from the ‘SVG ’ table. OpenType has a facility whereby color
> palette variables are provided in the above user agent style sheet as well;
> see https://www.microsoft.com/typography/otspec/svg.htm.
> 3.
> Since it’s been addressed above, delete:
> > Issue 4: Should the CSS Variables that map the palette colors into the
> document be defined here too? It probably makes sense to keep that in the
> OpenType specification.
> Reason: It makes sense to have OT be the single place the color palette
> variables facility is defined in. It probably makes sense for OT to be the
> sole place the UA style sheet in ‘font document’ (sec 2) is defined in as
> well, though that isn’t part of this proposal.
> 4.
> Sec 3.1 External References says:
> > Issue 5: This is all too handwavy. And we perhaps shouldn't try to make
> an exhaustive list. This needs to be defined in terms of Fetch, probably.
> And the URL Standard for comparing the URLs.
> I’d like to request that the document resolve this issue. I’ve heard
> concern from implementors about this “handwavy”ness.
> Best,
> Sairus
Received on Monday, 23 May 2016 23:04:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:04 UTC