[mpeg-OTspec] Abstract for ISO/IEC 14496-28 CFR

[mpsuzuki at hiroshima-u.ac.jp]

I prefer the text revised by Ken; saying "64K" is more
appropriate than "100,000".

About the replacement of "a single font" by "a single
font resource", although ISO/IEC 14496-22 text does
not use "font resource" as a word to count something
(e.g. in TTC description, the counted is font, like,
"number of fonts"), ISO/IEC 14496-28 uses "font resource"
to mean such, the revised text is more harmonized with
the mentioned standard.

Regards,
suzuki toshiya, Hiroshima University, Japan


On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 16:26:34 -0800
Ken Lunde <lunde at adobe.com> wrote:

>Vladimir,
>
>How about the following revision?
>
>>Recent additions of new characters that represent most of the world's
>>writing systems resulted in a significant increase of the Unicode
>>character repertoire, which now encodes more than 100,000 characters.
>>However, due to limitations of many bitfields, the existing ISO/IEC
>>14496-22 "Open Font Format" (OFF) specification allows a single font
>>resource to support only up to 64K glyphs. In other words, there are
>>significantly more characters in Unicode than the number of glyphs that
>>can be included in a single font resource. The ISO/IEC 14496-28
>>"Composite Font Representation" standard overcomes these limitations by
>>standardizing an XML-based representation that allows linking of
>>existing fonts resources -- not limited only to OFF -- into a single
>>"Composite Font" that can be used as a virtual font.
>
>Regards...
>
>-- Ken
>
>On Feb 6, 2012, at 4:00 PM, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote:
>
>> [Attachment(s) from Levantovsky, Vladimir included below]
>> 
>> Dear all,
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Please see the attached draft text of the Abstract, which will be
>published on ISO website (both in ISO online catalog and ISO web
>store). > 
>> The text must be finalized by the end of this week and submitted on
>Friday, Feb., 10 along with the text of the standard. Your comments are
>very much appreciated; in absence of any comments received I will
>assume that the abstract is approved and can be submitted as is. > 
>>  
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> 
>> Vladimir
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>