[MPEG-OTSPEC] Call for Consensus RE: proposal: COLR extension

Behdad Esfahbod behdad at behdad.org
Thu Oct 1 20:46:41 CEST 2020

I object to the COLRv1 proposal made by Peter, because I realized that it
does NOT encode what was decided technically in the github repo it was

Moving forward, I'm also going to object to ANY proposal that was NOT
developed in the open on this mailing list. Because as was made very clear
to me, no place other than this list is considered part of the ISO process
and as such is NOT subject to any form of process or regulations for


On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 12:37 PM Levantovsky, Vladimir <
Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com> wrote:

> Dear AHG members,
> The proposal for extension of COLR table (introducing the new version1),
> developed as a collaborative effort of multiple members of this group, was
> presented this week and has been discussed in the GitHub repo (
> https://github.com/MPEGGroup/OpenFontFormat/issues/20).
> This email is a call for consensus to introduce this proposal to the
> SC29/WG3 and to recommend that this proposal, along with the some
> additional changes for font variations common table formats be considered
> by the WG as the basis for a new amendment to OFF standard (ISO/IEC
> 14496-22/AMD2).
> To make sure that there is no confusion on how this work is going to
> proceed (if adopted) and what this call for consensus is seeking to
> achieve, please note that:
> -          If our proposal and recommendations to start a new amendment
> are adopted, the WG will prepare and publish a new working draft of the
> future amendment. I will ask for this new working draft be made public so
> that the content of the changes and the technical details can be once again
> reviewed by the AHG, and we will be able to introduce new changes and
> corrections, if necessary.
> -          This call for consensus is _*not*_ seeking for you to state
> your support for the proposed technical changes. I am asking for a _*consensus
> to issue AHG recommendation**_* that the new amendment work should be
> initiated based on these initial proposals. This recommendation (if the
> consensus is reached) will be recorded as part of the AHG report to the WG,
> which I prepare and present on this list for your final review and approval.
> I’d like to ask you to voice your _*objections*_ (if any, stating your
> reasons for objection) to this call for a consensus recommendation to open
> a new work item. (If you want to voice your support for this new amendment,
> this is fine too, but not required for the purpose of this call.)
> If I do not hear any objections by end of day Monday, Oct. 5th, I will
> prepare and submit the proposed technical changes as input contributions on
> behalf of AHG, and will prepare and share with you the AHG report
> summarizing the work conducted in this AHG and our recommendations to the
> WG.
> Thank you,
> Vladimir
> *From:* mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at> * On Behalf Of *Peter
> Constable
> *Sent:* Monday, September 28, 2020 5:22 PM
> *To:* MPEG OT Spec list (mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at) <
> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
> *Subject:* [MPEG-OTSPEC] proposal: COLR extension
> I’ve created an issue in the repo for discussion: Proposal: extension to
> COLR table (COLR v1)
> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/R_a_Cv2z58hWOA9EiQGuTI>.
> Google has prepared a proposal
> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/NoXmCwpA5KsL0yjvhqD-sg> to extend the
> COLR table with significantly enhanced capabilities. This followed from
> initial discussion at a meeting in 2019 that included people from various
> companies, with a general consensus to proceed. I was commissioned by
> Google to adapt that into proposed revisions to the OpenType spec and to
> OFF.
> Attached are preliminary drafts related to this:
>    - revisions to the COLR section—the bulk of the changes
>    - revisions to the Variations Common Table Formats section
>    - revisions to the CPAL section
> Two variants for each are attached: one showing changes from OpenType
> 1.8.3, which would be approximately the same as changes from OFF:2019 +
> Amd1; and one showing the net result, with line numbering for easy
> reference.
> Google and I are proposing that this be the basis for a proposed new
> edition of OFF.
> Note: There is not a new edition in ISO's balloting process yet. That
> means that the technical content is not yet final, wrt ISO process.
> Assuming work on a new edition were approved at the next WG3 and SC29
> meetings, technical balloting on the new edition would go well into 2021.
> The draft for the proposed COLR table revisions is not yet complete, but
> there's enough in place that should allow a technical reader to get a
> pretty good understanding of proposed new structures and how they work.
> Also, the specifics on how the color gradation is calculated for a radial
> gradient have yet to be added, but the description of the structure used
> for it should, I think, give a clear idea of what the capabilities are.
> Some visual examples are forthcoming that will provide greater clarity.
> The Google proposal was prepared by Behdad Esfahbod, Dominik Röttsches,
> and Rod Sheeter, with input and review feedback from several others
> including: Dave Crossland, Laurence Penney, Adam Twardoch, Cosimo Lupo,
> Rossen, Atanassov, Roel Nieskens, "Pomax", "bungeman", and myself.
> (Apologies if I missed anyone.)
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201001/ea28111e/attachment.html>

More information about the mpeg-otspec mailing list