[MPEG-OTSPEC] Removal of the CFF and CF2 from OFF standard

Adam Twardoch (Lists) list.adam at twardoch.com
Fri Oct 9 04:01:09 CEST 2020

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15924 has an appointed registrar, and the
content is easily available.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_639-2 also has a registration authority
(Library of Congress)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Coded_Character_Set (ISO 10646) is
also de facto developed by an external org (the Unicode Consortium) and ISO
10646 reflects a portion of Unicode (the list of codes and names, plus the
code charts which actually Unicode produces).

The underlying source data (by Unicode) is liberally licensed, see

The code charts are not liberally licensed, mainly because they are made
with proprietary fonts. If this were done today, the Unicode charts could
be made with, say, Noto, and could be liberally licensed.

The text of the Unicode standard has various licenses — but the fact is
that at least large parts of the Unicode Standard are liberally licensed,
and furthermore, the Unicode Consortium could decide to opensource more if
felt that way. Yet this does not in any way interfere with the fact that
ISO then holds the final copyright on the final ISO 10646.


On Fri, 9 Oct 2020 at 02:11, John Hudson <john at tiro.ca> wrote:

> On 08102020 1:56 pm, Dave Crossland wrote:
> > Having the two standards reference each other seems undesirable to me.
> > I see no issue with maintaining an "elsewhere" project, and regularly
> > submitting it to ISO for "international-standard-izatoin"
> Q. If an implementation spec is developed in an open process, using
> appropriate collaborative tools and with a public and editable draft,
> and then submitted to ISO for standardisation, who then owns the content
> and can the draft in its current state continue to be public and provide
> the basis for subsequent development independent of the OFF text?
> As I said, my concern is about process: I'm ambivalent about whether the
> implementation and data format standards are combined or separate. I
> don't think it matters a whole lot, other than insofar as it may imply
> things about process and how work is done. OT/OFF already references
> other standards, and software in general and the Internet in particular
> is a web of cross-referenced standards.
> If the argument for rolling the implementation specs into the same
> standard as the data format spec is that specs for content and content
> implementation belong together then OFF belongs in Unicode. ;-)
> JH
> --
> John Hudson
> Tiro Typeworks Ltd    www.tiro.com
> Salish Sea, BC        tiro at tiro.com
> NOTE: In the interests of productivity, I am currently
> dealing with email on only two days per week, usually
> Monday and Thursday unless this schedule is disrupted
> by travel. If you need to contact me urgently, please
> use some other method of communication. Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201009/eadc1e84/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the mpeg-otspec mailing list