[mpeg-OTspec] Draft ballot comments for 3rd edition OFF text

[Levantovsky, Vladimir]

HI Cameron,

Thank you for reminding me about your comment, I marked it to follow up with you but never did.

Regarding the changes you suggest earlier, I have a couple of questions:

1) Right now, the SVG Integration document is listed in the Bibliography section and is meant to be informative. We do reference it when describing the secure animation mode, however, the normative requirements for scripts, external references, etc. are explicitly defined in the text of the OFF. For the changes you suggested (i.e. remove UA style sheet definitions in OFF and reference them from SVG Integration document) - the document would have to be made normative. Do you know when the document is going to be finalized?  It would be good to have it moved to at least Last Call status before the OFF text is published (which is expected to happen in April - July 2015).

2) Alternatively, we could do something similar to how secure animation mode is described - normative UA style sheet requirements can be described verbally in the OFF text, with the reference to exact UA style sheet definitions in the SVG Integration. If this is acceptable, please suggest the exact language you want to see in the spec.

My personal preference would be to do the latter and not be dependent on the progression of the SVG Integration document while still be able to reference it.

Thank you,
Vlad


-----Original Message-----
From: Cameron McCormack [mailto:cam at mcc.id.au] 
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 4:20 AM
To: Levantovsky, Vladimir; mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpeg-OTspec] Draft ballot comments for 3rd edition OFF text

Hi Vlad,

[Sorry for the delay in replying; just back at work today after vacation.]

On 21/05/14 05:44, 'Levantovsky, Vladimir' 
vladimir.levantovsky at monotype.com [mpeg-OTspec] wrote:
> Please see attached the draft ballot comments I have prepared so far 
> for the review. The ballot will close on July 6, and our responses 
> will have to be submitted by early June to make it through the process 
> and be submitted to the ISO Secretariat on time. We still have a 
> couple of weeks to finalize the comments and come up with additional 
> recommended changes for which the consensus can be reached.

Should there be an entry in that document for the comments I sent about referencing the SVG Integration specification?  See my mail to this list "referencing SVG Integration specification for SVG glyph requirements" 
sent on April 18.