FW: [mpeg-OTspec] RE: Proposed changes to the OFF specification

[Levantovsky, Vladimir]

Rather than simply identifying (or even worth, trying to retrofit) the 'offending' fonts that may contain OS/2 'Panose' values outside of "Latin Text" family kind, I think it would be interesting to see how the existing implementations behave when those font are encountered, and what the outcome is. Knowing whether the "Panose 1.5" values are ignored, result in being misinterpreted or if they actually cause problems would help to get a better understanding of the problem.

This is not to say that the limitations imposed by the previous versions of the spec should always define the outcome of the future changes - I think it is perfectly normal and reasonable to expect that at some point the new features may be introduced to improve the standard, and that implementations would have to be updated to handle them. In case with Panose field - it seems reasonable to extend the existing functionality from supporting a "Latin Text" only kind to a full Panose spec, and I can definitely see a benefit of extending font matching capabilities to support non-Latin fonts as well.

Thank you,
Vladimir


From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David Lemon
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 7:46 PM
To: Michelle Perham; John Hudson
Cc: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com; Greg Hitchcock; Simon Daniels
Subject: RE: FW: [mpeg-OTspec] RE: Proposed changes to the OFF specification




That set will unfortunately include some of Adobe's. We're in the process of figuring out which of ours fall into this category. (I suspect it's only a few, but that's TBD.)
- thanks,
 David L


At 1:53 PM -0700 7/22/11, Michelle Perham wrote:
According to Greg, yes, there is a risk of these problems. What we don't know is how many of these fonts exist.

Michelle



From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Hudson
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 10:36 AM
Cc: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: FW: [mpeg-OTspec] RE: Proposed changes to the OFF specification

I am aware of some fonts using what Greg labels Panose 1.5 values in the
OS/2 table. Am I correct in thinking that there is a risk of these being
misinterpreted or, in case of values out of range of Panose 1.0, ignored
or causing problems?

JH


--
David Lemon
Sr Manager, Type Development
Adobe Systems, Inc.

408 536 4152
lemon at adobe.com
http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20110725/16bce470/attachment.html>