[OpenType] Re: [mpeg-OTspec] Interaction between kern table and GPOS table

[Levantovsky, Vladimir]

The draft corrigendum has already been closed and will now be under three-month ballot. If there are any changes that we would like to introduce to any part of the document, we should discuss them on this list and then submit them as ballot comments.

Best regards,
Vladimir


From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Sairus Patel
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 5:22 PM
To: John Hudson; opentype-migration-list at indx.co.uk
Cc: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [OpenType] Re: [mpeg-OTspec] Interaction between kern table and GPOS table



“Font makers” is preferable to “font vendors,” yes. Vladimir, could you please make that change? Here’s the complete revised sentence:



"If compatibility with legacy environments is not a concern, font makers are encouraged to record kerning in the GPOS table's kern feature and not in the kern table."



John wrote:

>Daniel Strebe wrote:
>
>> Whatever happened to “foundry”?



Did Daan write that on a message on this thread? I didn’t receive any such message, nor do I see one on the mpeg-OTspec’s archives. I haven’t consistently been getting copies even of my own emails sent to this thread (and yes, I’ve checked my spam reports), which now makes me worried about whether I’m missing important messages from others.



Sairus


From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Hudson
Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2010 7:40 PM
To: opentype-migration-list at indx.co.uk
Cc: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [OpenType] Re: [mpeg-OTspec] Interaction between kern table and GPOS table



Chris Fynn wrote:

> Yes ~ but when writing standards I think one should, as far as possible,
> try to use plain English in preference to insider terms or jargon.
> Technical terminology is of course unavoidable but particular terms
> should be clearly defined somewhere in the standard.

I agree.

Daniel Strebe wrote:

> Whatever happened to “foundry”?

Foundry may imply either a maker of a font, a seller of a font, or both.
It also implies some kind of corporate entity, however small.

I think things like recommendations about how to build fonts should be
addressed to the person making a font. Hence, 'font developer' or, more
simply yet, 'font maker' seem to me decent terms.

Sairus, would you have any objected to your text being changed to

"If compatibility with legacy environments is not
a concern, font makers are encouraged to record
kerning in the GPOS table's kern feature and not
in the kern table."

?

JH

--

Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
Gulf Islands, BC tiro at tiro.com<mailto:tiro%40tiro.com>

Car le chant bien plus que l'association d'un texte
et d'une mélodie, est d'abord un acte dans lequel
le son devient l'expression d'une mémoire, mémoire
d'un corps immergé dans le mouvement d'un geste
ancestral. - Marcel Pérès

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20100125/32752da2/attachment.html>