[mpeg-OTspec] RE: Ballot comments on ISO/IEC 14496-22 OFF Draft International Standard (DIS)

Wed Feb 28 03:02:55 CET 2018

Great! I think we are done with comments - thank you Peter, and thank you all who contributed your time to review the draft.

Regards,
Vladimir

On Feb 27, 2018, at 4:38 PM, Peter Constable petercon at microsoft.com<mailto:petercon at microsoft.com> [mpeg-OTspec] <mpeg-OTspec-noreply at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec-noreply at yahoogroups.com>> wrote:

Wow, that’s twice I misread and thought the wording was corrected.

“If a font contains Unicode supplementary-plane characters…”

Peter

From: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com<mailto:Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 7:18 AM
To: Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft.com<mailto:petercon at microsoft.com>>; mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: Ballot comments on ISO/IEC 14496-22 OFF Draft International Standard (DIS)

Thank you Peter,

In #31, the first portion of that sentence “If a font contains characters Unicode supplementary-plane characters …” doesn’t sound right.
I suggested two possible edits – one being “If a font contains Unicode supplementary-plane characters …” where the first occurrence of the word “characters” is dropped, and the second “If a font contains characters from the Unicode supplementary-plane characters” with clarifying words added – do you have a preference for either one of these options, or would you rather suggest a different language?

Thank you,
Vlad

From: Peter Constable [mailto:petercon at microsoft.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 10:08 AM
To: Levantovsky, Vladimir; mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: Ballot comments on ISO/IEC 14496-22 OFF Draft International Standard (DIS)

Hi, Vlad.

#9) Sounds reasonable.

#29) Yes, I agree. I would change that sentence to: “This is the standard character-to-glyph-index mapping table for the Windows platform for fonts that support Unicode BMP characters.”

#31) Must have been late-night editing on my part. I’d change to: “If a font contains characters Unicode supplementary-plane characters (U+10000 to U+10FFFF), then it's likely that it will also include Unicode BMP characters (U+0000 to U+FFFF) as well.”

#33) Yes, and I’d suggest similar wording to the above: “This is the standard character-to-glyph-index mapping table for the Windows platform for fonts supporting Unicode supplementary-plane characters (U+10000 to U+10FFFF).”

#60) I suspect that detail has been in OFF since the first edition. But I was noticed it and had a similar reaction that it was odd in the OFF context. I agree with your change for OFF.

Thanks!
Peter

From: Levantovsky, Vladimir [mailto:Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 3:10 PM
To: Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft.com<mailto:petercon at microsoft.com>>; mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: Ballot comments on ISO/IEC 14496-22 OFF Draft International Standard (DIS)

Hi Peter,

Thank you once again for your diligent review of the DIS text.
After reviewing your proposed comments, I suggest a few minor changes:

Comment #9 – clarifying Fixed datatype description: I am not sure that your suggested 2nd sentence saying “Fixed values will not be used in the future for any new tables that may be introduced” is truly needed, since the 1st sentence already states that “Only certain tables use a Fixed value for version, and only for reasons of backward compatibility”. What happens in the future is 100% in our control (as far as not using the “Fixed” datatype is concerned), I am not sure there is a benefit in explicitly stating this. I suggest to simply omit the second sentence.

Comment #29 – question regarding using company names vs. platform names: In this comment (and in quite a few places elsewhere in the spec) we sometimes refer to Windows (MacOS, etc.) platform and sometimes use company names that developed those platforms or contributed a specific technology. I believe that when it comes to technical details, using platform names in most cases would be preferred to using company names – would you agree? In this particular case, would saying “This is the Windows standard character-to-glyph-index mapping table for fonts that support Unicode BMP characters” be appropriate, especially since you go on and refer to other “subtable formats for Unicode encoding on the Windows platform”?

Comment #31 – redundant “character” references: suggest to remove and/or change the highlighted portions in “If a font contains characters Unicode supplementary-plane characters (U+10000 to U+10FFFF), then it's like it will also include Unicode BMP characters (U+0000 to U+FFFF) as well” to either
“If a font contains Unicode supplementary-plane characters (U+10000 to U+10FFFF), then it's likely it will also include Unicode BMP characters (U+0000 to U+FFFF) as well”, or, alternatively, insert
“If a font contains characters from the Unicode supplementary-plane characters (U+10000 to U+10FFFF), then it's likely it will also …”.

Comment #33 – similar question as comment 29 regarding the use of platform vs. company name.

Comment #60 – clarifying deprecation of ISO Platform ID: Since ISO standard was initially based on OT 1.4, I think it is redundant to mention a specific timeline that involves OT1.3, and suggest changing the paragraph to say: “Platform ID 2 (ISO) has been deprecated. It was intended to represent ISO/IEC 10646, as opposed to Unicode. It is redundant, however, since both standards have identical character code assignments.”

On a quick glance, the rest of the comments look good.

Thank you,
Vladimir

From: Levantovsky, Vladimir
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 3:24 PM
To: 'Peter Constable'; mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: Ballot comments on ISO/IEC 14496-22 OFF Draft International Standard (DIS)

Thank you Peter,
I will review and incorporate your comments in the response to the DIS ballot.

All, if you have any comments that have not been submitted yet, please send them to this list. I plan to finalize and submit all comments early next week, to ensure that they will be processed in time for the next WG11 meeting in April.

Cheers,
Vladimir

From: Peter Constable [mailto:petercon at microsoft.com]
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 2:32 PM
To: Levantovsky, Vladimir; mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: Ballot comments on ISO/IEC 14496-22 OFF Draft International Standard (DIS)

I’ve gone through the draft, some portions in detail but not all. Representing Microsoft, I offer the attached as proposed US ballot comments.

Peter

From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com> <mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com>> On Behalf Of 'Levantovsky, Vladimir' vladimir.levantovsky at monotype.com<mailto:vladimir.levantovsky at monotype.com> [mpeg-OTspec]
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 11:56 AM
To: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com<mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [mpeg-OTspec] Ballot comments on ISO/IEC 14496-22 OFF Draft International Standard (DIS)

Dear all,

I am happy to inform you that the text of the latest draft text of the 4th edition OFF standard has been published and available for your review.
The document w17166 was made accessible to general public and can be downloaded from the following page:
https://mpeg.chiariglione.org/standards/mpeg-4/open-font-format/text-isoiec-dis-14496-22-4th-edition<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fmpeg.chiariglione.org-252Fstandards-252Fmpeg-2D4-252Fopen-2Dfont-2Dformat-252Ftext-2Disoiec-2Ddis-2D14496-2D22-2D4th-2Dedition-26amp-3Bdata-3D02-257C01-257Cpetercon-2540microsoft.com-257C0f996506b57242080df108d5382c571e-257C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47-257C1-257C0-257C636476685450914724-26amp-3Bsdata-3DH0QtLdn0dhqWl1KdgUTd0dMkRHYT0cLu0SYO2Mxe0OQ-253D-26amp-3Breserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMGaQ%26c%3DeuGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM%26r%3Djb2T9D8Np5j0t1X2JtGDVMxJyD5fvLoEPxzRs46vOK4UfGfOrlVsyuleed6YRZk5%26m%3D5SomVVs9XRsBqer81zhOXsmToYESuVX1t4nuBaw42us%26s%3Du9CNDxEwmJYsa_osCZOvWk29qhbWB5i-sJmmETTJ41g%26e%3D&data=04%7C01%7Cpetercon%40microsoft.com%7Cb3bb823e02ab4320dbca08d57d6e0f49%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636552834030391940%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwifQ%3D%3D%7C-1&sdata=cklh5x%2FjhettERGs0rHMEJgF32VAr4lnhbyB%2BD%2FHIUM%3D&reserved=0>

The finalized list of comments is due by the end of February 2018, we should plan to submit and finalize the comments by at least Feb. 23, 2018.

Thank you all for your contributions to this development!
Vladimir

________________________________

This email has been scanned for spam and viruses. Click here<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fus-2Dspambrella.cloud-2Dprotect.net-252Findex01.php-253Fmod-5Fid-253D11-2526mod-5Foption-253Dlogitem-2526mail-5Fid-253D1519414328-2DAvqrxW4uw7rD-2526r-5Faddress-253Dvladimir.levantovsky-252540monotype.com-2526report-253D1-26amp-3Bdata-3D04-257C01-257Cpetercon-2540microsoft.com-257Cb3bb823e02ab4320dbca08d57d6e0f49-257C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47-257C1-257C0-257C636552834030411959-257CUnknown-257CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwifQ-253D-253D-257C-2D1-26amp-3Bsdata-3DBSuW7MJnK-252BQ6sie9CVLTVH4ScFNzigBQ5JsMroTyiV8-253D-26amp-3Breserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMGaQ%26c%3DeuGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM%26r%3DSc-ry7Q3xvBnomEBkMoE2_ivmrUn9t3iPURPqMYwR3mRAaAfoxAAQdIUO6oCmSDQ%26m%3DeccRebvEtmIFUr1HExIW3mrNrXnV2L5aUTn0Oxu2Nr4%26s%3DKerNBbIEeXLslkGLFnaW_FVvhCAg02VioO2JMWnnbds%26e%3D&data=04%7C01%7Cpetercon%40microsoft.com%7C6c511524cd1d4a5a0bde08d57df54afb%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636553414844641221%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwifQ%3D%3D%7C-1&sdata=uILMaedvgrviqee3JiYgAQP5KqZF6wZDjaDsZKVMz2o%3D&reserved=0> to report this email as spam.

________________________________

This email has been scanned for spam and viruses. Click here<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fus-2Dspambrella.cloud-2Dprotect.net-252Findex01.php-253Fmod-5Fid-253D11-2526mod-5Foption-253Dlogitem-2526mail-5Fid-253D1519744113-2Dw7aNP71WcJaR-2526r-5Faddress-253Dvladimir.levantovsky-252540monotype.com-2526report-253D1-26amp-3Bdata-3D04-257C01-257Cpetercon-2540microsoft.com-257C6c511524cd1d4a5a0bde08d57df54afb-257C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47-257C1-257C0-257C636553414844641221-257CUnknown-257CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwifQ-253D-253D-257C-2D1-26amp-3Bsdata-3DenIQaJzSQKG-252Fv3XPX5YsBUBxHX7K6bpgB1HmZbTKZbI-253D-26amp-3Breserved-3D0&d=DwMGaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=jb2T9D8Np5j0t1X2JtGDVJ6FPFtBJQsSkOo2WUrCs2wDaDMjubx2uJNwnX72VM2o&m=9mZXQhtLjW9o5Bzg_BUnlCCekKwrVjRJbEKiO3Vj1xA&s=nchfQ2naaG2t8S9F7N0J899qmWf-3nXUtQjs6P4YId0&e=> to report this email as spam.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20180228/3521578c/attachment.html>