Inaccuracies in 'name' table proposed updates

[Sairus Patel]

In Vlad's Working Draft I see a couple of tweaks to the 'name' table wording. I don't know who proposed them, but at least one of them is inaccurate:

====
The following:

> All 'name' table strings for platform ID 3 (Windows platform) must be in Unicode, using the UTF-16 encoding form. The character set encding [sic] for 'name' table strings with platform ID 0 (Macintosh) is determined by the encoding ID.

was replaced in the WD by:

> Note that OS/2 and Windows both require that all name strings be defined in Unicode. Thus all 'name' table strings for platform ID = 3 (Windows) will require two bytes per character. Macintosh fonts require single byte strings.
====

The "two bytes per character" part is incorrect, given that there's a possibility that UTF-16 may be OK for Windows platform encoding 0, 1, and perhaps 10, from recent discussions on this list. Also, "Macintosh fonts require single byte strings" is vague -- single byte strings in which platform ID/encoding ID strings?

As Bob Hallissy, Josh Hadley, and others have pointed out, there is a significant amount of work needed to clean up the 'name' table with respect to (at least):
(a) encoding forms of strings and
(b) recommendations/requirements for what kind of 'name' strings are expected by various font engines and OSes.

Patching things piecemeal, as in the above example, complicates the issue since there are now more deltas to track (not to mention the fact that these patches aren't entirely accurate).

I'd strongly recommend backing out this change, as well as the one just before it in the WD (which introduced problematic wording such as "While both Apple and Microsoft support the same set of name strings..."), and revisiting them when we redo the 'name' table.

I think keeping the Preferred family -> Typographic family change is fine since it doesn't involve either (a) or (b) above.

Thanks,
Sairus