[mpeg-OTspec] AHG Kick-off

Ken Lunde lunde at adobe.com
Sat Feb 18 16:25:56 CET 2012


Thank you for confirming the (somewhat sad) reality of working on standards development. Given that ISO/IEC 14496-28:2012 is about 25 pages, its price shouldn't be extraordinarily high, and if memory serves, the price associated with ISO standards is largely based on the number of pages.

With regard to developing a schema for ISO/IEC 14496-28:2012, Vladimir can correct me if I am wrong or out of line, but this seems like something that is definitely within the scope of the AHG, something that would benefit developers, and something that could be distributed freely.


-- Ken

On Feb 17, 2012, at 5:26 PM, suzuki toshiya wrote:

> I'm not sure whether SC29 has a special convention, but when I've
> participated a development of an JTC1 spec in SC34, the convenor
> told me that JTC1 has no convention giving a free-charged copy for
> the editor.
> By the way, it should be discussed if it is possible for this AHG
> to develop a schema for ISO/IEC 14496-28 and distribute it freely,
> or such free schema should not be produced as "by SC29/WG11 Font AHG".
> Regards,
> mpsuzuki
> James Cloos wrote:
>>>>>>> "LV" == Levantovsky, Vladimir <vladimir.levantovsky at monotypeimaging.com> writes:
>> LV> I am afraid the copy of the standard can only be obtained via ISO Web Store
>> If those who participated in creating a spec cannot get a copy of it w/o
>> wasting cash (for which at least some of us have zero budget), then the
>> iso lacks any value as a standards organization.
>> The last draft of the composite font format posted here, before things
>> went off list, was far from ready for publication.  One would at the
>> very least like to know whether any of the issues I wrote about were
>> addressed.  (Especially sub-font naming.  Specifying subfonts only by
>> postscript name, as I previously wrote, makes implementation impossible
>> on current fontconfig-based systems.)
>> -JimC

More information about the mpeg-otspec mailing list