FW: [OpenType] [mpeg-OTspec] ISO/IEC 14496-22 Amendment for Font Collections

[Levantovsky, Vladimir]

Forwarding a missing email to the list - this one reply didn’t make it to this forum.

-----Original Message-----
From: listmaster at indx.co.uk [mailto:listmaster at indx.co.uk] On Behalf Of John H. Jenkins
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 1:00 PM
To: listmaster at indx.co.uk
Subject: Re: [OpenType] [mpeg-OTspec] ISO/IEC 14496-22 Amendment for Font Collections

Message from OpenType list:


> Levantovsky, Vladimir <vladimir.levantovsky at monotype.com> ©ó 2015¦~¤G¤ë¤Q¤K 09:20 ¼g¹D¡G
> 
> John,
> 
> Thank you for providing additional info, but it raises new questions:
> 
> 1)      When a font / SFNT resource is treated as a file for the purpose of calculating the checkSumAdjustment - does that include the table directory with all the offsets?

Yes.

> If yes, then wrapping that font in a font collection will invalidate  checkSumAdjustment values since the combined table directory for a collection will have different table offsets (and I doubt it would be ever possible to recreate the 'old' offsets to check font data integrity using checkSumsAdjustments for each individual font in the collection.
> 
> 2)      How do you treat checkSumAdjustment values for font collection entries in the current implementation? Are they ever checked or do you ignore them completely?

We pretty much ignore them completely.

> If latter is the case (and this is consistent with what other implementations do today) - given the current practices we should probably modify the spec and explicitly mention that checksums do not apply to font collections and must be ignored. Would you agree?
> 

Yes

> Thank you,
> Vladimir
> 
> 
> From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 'John H. Jenkins' jenkins at apple.com [mpeg-OTspec]
> Sent: Friday, April 03, 2015 1:46 PM
> To: Ken Lunde
> Cc: OTspec (mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com); opentype-list at indx.co.uk
> Subject: Re: [mpeg-OTspec] ISO/IEC 14496-22 Amendment for Font Collections
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know that we've ever thought of this is really being for a file, because for a long time the primary delivery mechanism for TrueType fonts at Apple was the 'sfnt' resource. At the moment, when we calculate the checksum adjustment, we treat the font as if it were a file (that is, as a contiguous block of data). The folding of the fonts into a collection happens later.
> 
> On 3 Apr 2015, at 10:18, Ken Lunde lunde at adobe.com<mailto:lunde at adobe.com> [mpeg-OTspec] <mpeg-OTspec-noreply at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec-noreply at yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
> 
> With regard to the "checkSumAdjustment" field of the 'head' table, long-time implementers of TrueType Collections, meaning Apple and Microsoft, are the ones who should weigh in on this particular issue. Given that the definition of this field is for a file, and because a Font Collection is merely a bucket of multiple 'sfnt' tables, and contains two or more "virtual" font files, my guess is that this field is ignored in the context of Font Collections. But again, Apple and Microsoft should weigh in for clarity and guidance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> ****** Attachments to this email message have been removed ******
> 
> 
> 
> List archive: http://www.indx.co.uk/biglistarchive/
> 
> subscribe: opentype-subscribe at indx.co.uk
> unsubscribe: opentype-unsubscribe at indx.co.uk
> messages: opentype-list at indx.co.uk
> 
> 




List archive: http://www.indx.co.uk/biglistarchive/

subscribe: opentype-subscribe at indx.co.uk
unsubscribe: opentype-unsubscribe at indx.co.uk
messages: opentype-list at indx.co.uk