[mpeg-OTspec] RE: font media types

Thu Apr 7 01:40:15 CEST 2011

Dear all,

Please see attached the updated draft amendment. The text of Annex E how includes "Interoperability considerations" section that details the usage of the proposed four font media types: font-ttf, font-cff, font-off and font-sfnt. Comments are welcome.

Please also review the main bode text of the amendment, which offers the updated list for script and language tags. Changes are highlighted in red. Please remember that we need to finalize this document by Friday this week.

Thank you,
Vladimir

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of Levantovsky, Vladimir
> Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 5:49 PM
> To: David Singer
> Cc: David Lemon; OTspec; Chris Lilley; Tab Atkins; Karsten Luecke
> Subject: RE: [mpeg-OTspec] RE: font media types
> 
> On Tuesday, April 05, 2011 5:13 PM David Singer wrote:
> >
> > Then I think we need one MIME type to match the one
> > specification/format that you have, and add the parameter later if it
> > proves needed.
> >
> > I think the questions asked ('which one should I use') indicate that
> > trying to separate as three top-level types isn't working.
> >
> 
> I believe the question was asked because the first draft did not offer
> any explanation on "which one should I use", and this is something that
> the next version will cover. I do believe having separate types for
> different types of outlines would be useful, for the reasons that were
> outlined in previous messages.
> 
> > For example, if I only handle one of the two outline formats (is that
> > even compliant),
> 
> Yes, the spec defines different conformance levels.
> 
> > I get yes/no/maybe as an answer on whether I can
> > handle a given file, based on its type.  If I handle both, I don't
> need
> > to know.
> 
> True. But this is not the case for every device / implementation out
> there - many do need to know, and IMO it would be easier for
> implementations if this info is communicated using dedicated type
> rather than via an additional parameter. Just my opinion, if this is
> not the case - I am fine using parameters instead.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Vlad
> 
> >
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Vlad
> > >
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: David Singer [mailto:singer at apple.com]
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 1:53 PM
> > >> To: Levantovsky, Vladimir
> > >> Cc: David Lemon; OTspec; Chris Lilley; Tab Atkins; Karsten Luecke
> > >> Subject: Re: [mpeg-OTspec] RE: font media types
> > >>
> > >> Just a question;  would the details of the contents be better
> > expressed
> > >> as an optimal paramater?
> > >>
> > >> e.g.
> > >>
> > >> application/font-off;glyphtype="ttf" to indicate that ttf kinds of
> > >> outlines are inside?
> > >>
> > >> On Apr 5, 2011, at 8:29 , Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> David,
> > >>>
> > >>> Thank you for your comments. The original intention was that the
> > >> proposed MIME media types should be assigned depending on a
> specific
> > >> type of glyph outlines data contained in a font, with font-ttf
> being
> > >> used for TrueType outlines, font-otf for CFF outlines, and font-
> off
> > as
> > >> an umbrella type to indentify a font that either has both types of
> > the
> > >> outlines or where glyph data type may be unknown to an
> application.
> > >>>
> > >>> If you believe this is a reasonable approach, I agree that it
> > should
> > >> be clarified in more details. We can also consider changing the
> > >> proposed media types, e.g. to be more specific and use font-ttf,
> > font-
> > >> cff and font-otf for the purposes outlined above.
> > >>>
> > >>> Other opinions / comments?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thank you,
> > >>> Vladimir
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: David Lemon [mailto:lemon at adobe.com]
> > >>>> Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 10:34 PM
> > >>>> To: Levantovsky, Vladimir; OTspec
> > >>>> Cc: Chris Lilley; Tab Atkins; Paul.Irish at molecular.com; Karsten
> > >> Luecke
> > >>>> Subject: [mpeg-OTspec] RE: font media types [1 Attachment]
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Valdimir et al.,
> > >>>> I'm unfamiliar with mime type applications, but it seems odd to
> me
> > >>>> that this does not indicate what distinctions are meant to be
> > drawn
> > >>>> between the three proposed types. I'll note that the formats
> > >>>> referenced by their names do not clarify this; TrueType is a
> > subset
> > >>>> of OpenType, which is (at least currently) equivalent to Open
> Font
> > >>>> Format.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Perhaps another way to ask this is: How would a compliant
> > >> application
> > >>>> decide which mime type to assign?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> - thanks,
> > >>>> David L
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> At 10:39 -0700 4/4/11, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote:
> > >>>>> Dear all,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Please see attached the updated working draft of the ISO/IEC
> > >>>>> 14496-22/PDAM2 with additional Annex E that defines three new
> > media
> > >>>>> types for fonts:
> > >>>>> application/font-ttf,
> > >>>>> application/font-otf, and
> > >>>>> application/font-off
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The document needs to be finalized before the end of the week,
> > and
> > >>>>> your comments are greatly appreciated.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thank you,
> > >>>>> Vladimir
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>> From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-
> > >>>> OTspec at yahoogroups.com]
> > >>>>>> On Behalf Of Levantovsky, Vladimir
> > >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 6:39 AM
> > >>>>>> To: OTspec
> > >>>>>> Subject: [mpeg-OTspec] FW: font media types
> > >>>>>> Importance: High
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Dear AHG,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Please see below the email from Mr. Karsten Luecke regarding
> the
> > >>>>>> registration of the MIME types for various font formats. I
> > brought
> > >>>> this
> > >>>>>> subject for consideration of the WG11 meeting, and we have
> > reached
> > >>>> an
> > >>>>>> agreement that it would make perfect sense for MPEG to
> register
> > >> the
> > >>>>>> MIME types for OFF and other related font formats (TTF, OTF,
> > ...)
> > >>>> under
> > >>>>>> the existing top level MIME "application" tree.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The decision was that the AHG should move quickly to finalize
> > the
> > >>>> list
> > >>>>>> of font formats for MIME type registration, suggest the MIME
> > types
> > >>>> to
> > >>>>>> apply for, and prepare the text of the application to IANA. At
> > the
> > >>>> same
> > >>>>>> time, we will have an extended two-week editing period for the
> > >>>> existing
> > >>>>>> Working Draft Amendment so that the proposed MIME types could
> be
> > >>>> added
> > >>>>>> in the text of the amendment before it's submitted for ballot.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> We need to proceed quickly - the text of the application
> > including
> > >>>> the
> > >>>>>> list of font formats and their corresponding MIME types must
> be
> > >>>>>> finalized no later than April 6th.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thank you and regards,
> > >>>>>> Vladimir
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>> From: Karsten Luecke [mailto:karsten.luecke at kltf.de]
> > >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 6:52 AM
> > >>>>>> Subject: font media types
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Dear Mr Levantovsky, Mr Atkins, Mr Lilley & Mr Irish,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> reading
> > >>>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-
> > >>>>>> wg/2010Nov/0051.html
> > >>>>>> and googling for media types for other font formats, I came
> > across
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> WOFF
> > >>>>>> application/font-woff
> > >>>>>>     according to
> > >>>>>>     http://dev.w3.org/webfonts/WOFF/spec/#appendix-b
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-
> > >>>>>> wg/2010Nov/0051.html
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> EOT
> > >>>>>> application/vnd.ms-fontobject
> > >>>>>>     which seems to be fine according to
> > >>>>>>     http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> TTF OTF (OFF?)
> > >>>>>> application/vnd.ms-opentype
> > >>>>>>     according to
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-
> > >>>>>> us/library/system.io.packaging.packagepart.contenttype.aspx
> > >>>>>>     but also
> > >>>>>> application/octet-stream
> > >>>>>>     according to
> > >>>>>>     http://www.jbarker.com/blog/2009/mime-type-css-web-fonts
> > >>>>>>     plus a not sufficiently answered request at
> > >>>>>>     http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-types/2008-
> > >>>>>> August/002066.html
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Is there anything reliable as regards TTF OTF OFF?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> It were nice to have a single place, like the iana.org page,
> to
> > >>>> refer
> > >>>>>> to
> > >>>>>> when it comes to this.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> (The samples on the jbarker.com make me wonder if the trailing
> > dot
> > >>>>>> should be included in the AddType declaration or not.)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Best wishes!
> > >>>>>> Karsten
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> David Lemon
> > >>>> Sr Manager, Type Development
> > >>>> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 408 536 4152
> > >>>> lemon at adobe.com
> > >>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ------------------------------------
> > >>>
> > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> David Singer
> > >> Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
> > >
> >
> > David Singer
> > Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/x-ygp-stripped
Size: 340 bytes
Desc: w11924_14496-22_PDAM2.zip
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20110406/0c32e5e7/attachment.bin>