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

[Renzhi Li]

After some more reading I have new objection around a wording around line 217:
This graph is expected to be acyclic—that is, a tree.
An acyclic directed graph (DAG) may not be a tree. When we are talking about the Paint's, it is possible that two offsets from different Paint's points to the same paint.

[cid:f63f9fd0-64aa-4d06-9e72-d536894f148d]

Please clarify that whether sharing Paints via directing offsets to same target is allowed.

Yours Sincerely,
Renzhi
________________________________
From: Dave Crossland <dcrossland at google.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 18:38
To: Renzhi Li <Renzhi.Li at microsoft.com>
Cc: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com>; MPEG OT Spec list (mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at) <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Call for Consensus RE: proposal: COLR extension



On Thu, Oct 1, 2020, 9:29 PM Renzhi Li <Renzhi.Li at microsoft.com<mailto:Renzhi.Li at microsoft.com>> wrote:
The updated (Oct 1) version looked fine for me. Retract my objection.

Thank you!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20201002/5e37e328/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 38297 bytes
Desc: image.png
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20201002/5e37e328/attachment-0001.png>