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

Fri Aug 21 15:03:30 CEST 2020

Murata-san is correct.
The font work has always been a part of MPEG Systems Subgroup activity, and now continues to be the part of newly formed MPEG Systems WG (WG3).

Thank you,
Vlad

On Aug 21, 2020, at 4:50 AM, MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:

I heard that OFF was allocated to SC29/WG3, which is
convened by Youngkwon Lim (Korea).  He is an MPEG
expert, working for Samsung.  The new chair of SC29 is
Sullivan Gary at Microsoft.  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Sullivan_(engineer)<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/gQ4_CgJGKnTA7MNQINhN_z>

Regards,
Makoto

2020年8月21日(金) 15:30 James Clark <jjc at jclark.com<mailto:jjc at jclark.com>>:
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/<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/AE2ACjRkM0unvWANiRalEu/>

James

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:50 AM Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com<mailto: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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/VUMUCkRlKruOpx4GIQZoBX>

Thank you,
Vlad

On Aug 20, 2020, at 9:07 AM, MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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/nFKcClYmL2U2vQk4UqDHpF>.  But SC29 started standardization of OFF anyway and claimed OFF is in its then scope<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/h8J7CmZn6YIjrO64fQVYPT>.  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<mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/Xu_SCJ62ANhqDMVnfzG2Vd<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/ovASCn5oXgs7Y8xBcEiajL>
_______________________________________________
mpeg-otspec mailing list
mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/ovASCn5oXgs7Y8xBcEiajL>
_______________________________________________
mpeg-otspec mailing list
mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/ovASCn5oXgs7Y8xBcEiajL>

--
Regards,
Makoto
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20200821/e2a00452/attachment-0001.html>