[mpeg-OTspec] Proposed CFR amendment

[Ken Lunde]

Vladimir,

Normatively referencing ISO/IEC 14496-22 in ISO/IEC 14496-28 makes a lot of sense to me.

Regards...

-- Ken

On Oct 21, 2013, at 11:12 AM, "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <vladimir.levantovsky at monotype.com> wrote:

> 
> Hello all,
> 
>  
> 
> Since I haven’t heard any objections to the proposed amendment, I am ready to upload it to the MPEG document registry as input contribution, but I do have one more question regarding this.
> 
>  
> 
> We mention OFF as the font format for components in CFR but we do not have any references to  the standard itself. Was it intentional or is it just a missing piece that can be added at this time? I.e., should we list ISO/IEC 14496-22 as one of the normative references in clause 2 of the CFR standard?
> 
>  
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Vlad
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Levantovsky, Vladimir
> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 3:59 PM
> To: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [mpeg-OTspec] Proposed CFR amendment [1 Attachment]
> 
>  
> 
> [Attachment(s) from Levantovsky, Vladimir included below] 
> 
> 
> 
> Dear AHG members,
> 
>  
> 
> It’s been a while since the CFR standard (ISO/IEC 14496-28:2012) has been published, and, as more and more implementers start working with the spec, I received some questions regarding certain parts and definitions that would benefit from additional clarifications and updates. In an attempt to clarify some of the implementer’s questions I had off-list discussions with the developers, and the results of the discussions can be roughly subdivided into the following categories:
> 
> -          How to deal with missing or inconsistent font metrics data (where components font metrics may differ from one another and from the metrics defined by CFR resource;
> 
> -          How individual component fonts can be adjusted to fit the composite font structure, and how the adjustment affects overall font metrics;
> 
> -          Clarify the priority order of the component definitions and if/how user language preferences may affect the component font priority order;
> 
>  
> 
> As the editor of the spec, I took the liberty to collect the answers to those questions and compile them into the spec amendment language – the draft proposal is attached here for your review. There are still some questions remaining (about ‘macStyle’ and ‘italic’ arguments of ‘FontMetrics’ element) that need to be finalized – I propose that after reviewing the draft the AHG should make a recommendation to start the amendment to update the language of the standard.
> 
>  
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Vladimir
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>