[MPEG-OTSPEC] OFF: SC29 and SC34 (was "Re: Updates to specification")

[James Clark]

How do fonts (and this AHG) fit into the scopes of the newly reorganized
SC29 working groups?

I found this a helpful summary of the recent changes in SC29:

https://jtc1info.org/future-of-sc-29-with-jpeg-and-mpeg/

James

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:50 AM Levantovsky, Vladimir <
Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com> wrote:

> Dear Murata-san,
>
> Don’t you think it is disingenuous to state that
> “SC 34’s offer was discussed by SC 29/WG 11, which at the time was
> responsible for OFF (but has been disbanded recently)”?
>
> Especially when you know full well that SC29/WG11 (also known as MPEG
> Committee) was not “disbanded” like you claim, but rather reorganized into
> a new committee that now combines a number of Advisory and Working Groups.
> I’d think that among the AHG participants you’d be the one to know the
> difference.
> https://www.iso.org/committee/45316.html
>
> Thank you,
> Vlad
>
>
> On Aug 20, 2020, at 9:07 AM, MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp>
> wrote:
>
> 
> Dear colleagues,
>
> 2020年8月15日(土) 2:33 Levantovsky, Vladimir <
> Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com>:
>
>> On Friday, August 14, 2020 1:10 PM Dave Crossland wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 12:38 PM Levantovsky, Vladimir <
>> Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com> wrote:
>>
>> Input documents (as is the case here) are produced by their contributing
>> members and it’s up to them whether they decide to make them public. In
>> this particular case, the liaison letter from SC34 isn’t public and is only
>> accessible to accredited members of the SC29 behind the login,
>>
>>
>>
>> I see. That is disappointing. Is a summary available?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Murata-san has been directly involved in the process of authoring the SC34
> liaison, I’d like to delegate it to him to provide us with the summary.
>
>
> Since ISO/IEC directives do not allow me to disclose the liaison statement
> here, let me give a summary as well as some historical background from the
> SC34's point of view.
>
> Fonts are in the scope of SC34
> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/OZCyCER2v0u3NXYqiNOqwj>.  But SC29
> started standardization of OFF anyway and claimed OFF is in its then scope
> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/8FYjCG62xMh1QX68H7B0hC>.  SC34 has
> spoken with SC29 (on and off) without much success.
>
> In its recent liaison statement to SC29, SC 34 has offered to collaborate
> with SC 29 in a Joint Working Group.  SC 34’s offer was discussed by SC
> 29/WG 11, which at the time was responsible for OFF (but has been disbanded
> recently).  SC 29/WG 11 decided that SC34 did not provide sufficient
> justification to start a revision project, so recommended to SC 29 not
> to start a revision project and not to form a Joint Working Group with SC
> 34 to handle the revision.  While OFF remains the responsibility of SC 29
> within JTC 1, there is nothing that SC 34 can do to revise OFF.
>
> Since SC34 has document format standards (OOXML, ODF, and EPUB), SC34 cares
> about interactions of fonts and document processing.   SC34 feels that
> interactions between fonts and document rendering applications have not
> been clearly defined.  In our understanding, different applications
> interact with fonts in different ways and this leads to divergent behavior.
> However, users expect that modern applications connected by the Internet
> exhibit behavior that is predictable and consistent. In particular, users
> expect that different web browsers on different platforms provide
> reasonably similar results when rendering documents.
>
> SC34 is very interested in collaborating with any experts who share our
> views about the limitations of OFF.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Makoto
> _______________________________________________
> mpeg-otspec mailing list
> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/Xu_SCJ62ANhqDMVnfzG2Vd
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpeg-otspec mailing list
> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20200821/40e639a5/attachment-0001.html>