AHG conference call reminder [1 Attachment]

[mpsuzuki at hiroshima-u.ac.jp]

Dear all,

My telephone suddenly crashed and I could not hear the
last 10 minutes of discussion. Please let me confirm
a few points.

According to Vladimir's minutes page 8, the issue raised
by Ken Lunde is described as: the range of character set
of Japanese fonts are often updated, so the names of font
face (or font pathname) are insufficient to avoid the
missing character issue.

I think, the issue Ken raised is a request of more fine-
tuned method to specify the character set (or glyph set)
of component font (e.g. how to request "component font A
should include all characters in JIS X 0213:2004").

# Ken, if the issue you raised is not for missing character
# issue but different glyph shape issue, please let me know.

If we restrict the scope to Japanese font, is it reasonable
to search a few feature tags like "jp78", "jp83", "jp90",
"hojo", "nlck", "jp04" etc? Although these feature tags
are introduced to specify the glyph shape of available
characters and they don't guarantee the availability itself
(e.g. the exist of "jp04" does not guarantee the availability
of all characters in JIS X 0213:2004).

Thinking about more generic database for fine-tuned subset,
the character subset list in ISO/IEC 10646 can be a candidate.
But its collection is very large and I hesitate to request
composite font drivers to know all of the list.

BTW, from another point of view, I think the version of
font is important to specify the component font. There are
several "complex" scripts that Microsoft ships the fonts
but has not fixed script-specific development informations
(e.g. Windows Vista has Mongolian font, but
	http://www.microsoft.com/typography/SpecificationsOverview.mspx
does not provide the information how to design Mongolian
font). I guess, when Microsoft has fixed the specification
for Mongolian and it is incompatibly different from current
implementation, the composite font designer want to specify
the version number of Mongolian font.

Regards,
mpsuzuki

On Mon, 18 May 2009 20:18:42 -0400
"Levantovsky, Vladimir" <vladimir.levantovsky at MonotypeImaging.com> wrote:

>Dear all,
>
> 
>
>Thank you for your active participation in the conference call. I
>uploaded the brief minutes of the discussion to AHG files (
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mpeg-OTspec/files/20090518-AHG_call-Compos
>ite_Fonts.ppt) and also attached them to this email for your review. 
>
>I would appreciate your comments.
>
> 
>
>Best regards,
>
>Vladimir
>
> 
>
> 
>
>From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com]
>On Behalf Of Levantovsky, Vladimir
>Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 11:40 AM
>To: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [mpeg-OTspec] AHG conference call reminder
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Dear all,
>
> 
>
>Just a friendly reminder that we will have a conference call today,
>Monday May 18th at 22:00 UTC (3:00pm US Pacific, 6:00pm US Eastern,
>Tuesday May 19th 7:00am in Japan, 
>http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=5&day=18&year
>=2009&hour=18&min=0&sec=0&p1=43).
>
>The dial-in information is below:
>
>USA: 
>
> 
>
>Toll free: 
>
>1-866-546-3377
>
> 
>
>Toll: 
>
>1-719-234-7872
>
>Japan:
>
> 
>
>Toll free: 
>
>00531 16 0959
>
> 	 
> 
>
>Toll: 
>
>+81 (0) 3 4455 1494
>
> 	 
>Participant Passcode:
>
>7758315606
>
>					
>
> 
>
>Please let me know if participants from other countries would like to
>join and I will provide the additional country-specific dial-in numbers.
>
> 
>
>Please see below the tentative agenda for our discussion today is
>presented below. We will decide the specific order in which these issues
>can be addressed during the conference call:
>
>1.       Approval of the agenda
>
>2.       Composite Font policy decisions
>
>3.       Composite Font metrics
>
>-          Line spacing;
>
>-          No-clipping zones;
>
>4.       Composite Font solution
>
>-          Component font tags
>
>-          Layout decisions and use of language /  script tags and
>Unicode range information
>
>-          Component font mapping / naming conventions
>
> 
>
>Thank you,
>
>Vladimir
>
> 
>
>
>
>