AHG conference call reminder [1 Attachment]

[Ken Lunde]

Suzuki-san,

What I was describing was a different situation. Very few of today's  
Japanese fonts will change prototypical glyphs without changing their  
names. For this reason, I do not feel that it is necessary to capture  
or specify any GSUB features that correspond to kanji glyphs.

What I was describing is the extremely conservative nature of the  
Japanese printing industry, and that changes made to fonts, even if  
they are considered to be corrections, are often unwanted or  
undesired, because they represent changes. For this reason, some  
Composite Font creators may wish to encapsulate or record the specific  
version of the font that was used, to ensure that the resulting  
Composite Font is the same when it is consumed. Of course, this field  
is not required, and we're taking steps to ensure that very few things  
are required, but the format needs to have facility to specify this  
level of detail, in case it is needed by a Composite Font creator.

Regards...

-- Ken

On 2009/05/18, at 18:36, mpsuzuki at hiroshima-u.ac.jp wrote:

> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>