[mpeg-OTspec] Final draft - AHG input contribution - REVIEW NEEDED (was: Clarification of some aspect of opentype SVG spec)

[Levantovsky, Vladimir]

Hi Bob,

Thank you for reviewing the draft. John modified his originally proposed text based on the comments you submitted earlier, I will let him to respond but we do need to finalize it for submission today. We will have a chance to edit the text during the meeting time next week and I will be able to accommodate late changes in the actual draft amendment.

Thank you,
Vlad


On Feb 16, 2016, at 8:08 PM, Bob Hallissy bobh528 at yahoo.com<mailto:bobh528 at yahoo.com> [mpeg-OTspec] <mpeg-OTspec-noreply at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec-noreply at yahoogroups.com>> wrote:



On 2016-02-16 at 09:36 'Levantovsky, Vladimir' wrote:

Please review and respond with your comments.

In the "Application interface" paragraph for the revised init/fina/medi/isol descriptions, the wording is revised from what John originally wrote, and I'm not sure the revision is correct. For example, the "Application interface" paragraph for "fina" ends by saying:

For GIDs with single-joining final forms found in the 'fina' coverage table, the application passes a GID to the feature and gets back a new GID.

The problem with this wording is that single-joining final forms won't be found in the 'fina' coverage table. Rather, for those isolates that have final forms it is the isolate form glyphs that will be in the coverage table and it is the purpose of the 'fina' feature to replace the isolate with the final form.

Similarly for the other lookups (though perhaps one could get away with this wording for the 'isol' feature).

Bob










-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20160217/072756d6/attachment.html>