[MPEG-OTSPEC] Introducing breaking changes into the spec (was: RE: [EXTERNAL] Proposal to deprecate derived search values)
John Hudson
john at tiro.ca
Mon Sep 14 18:46:30 CEST 2020
Y’all are talking as if the font wars were a bad thing.
As I recall, the font wars a) forced Adobe to open up the PS Type 1
format, enabling the explosion of independent font foundries of the
1990s, b) were a period of innovation resulting in better text rendering
that was a significant contribution to the success of the Internet, and
c) focused competitive efforts on internationalisation and complex
script support.
Yes, it was an uncomfortable time for the companies involved: it
required them to actually do things and to innovate. And yes, it came
with frustrations for font and tool makers trying to understand the new
formats and implement them correctly for competing platforms. There is a
lot of be said in favour of collaborative innovation on a single format,
but relying on buy-in to collaboration as a prerequisite for innovation
can collapse into inaction very easily.
JH
> I agree with the sentiment Peter and Rod expressed, and I would
> consider this particular venue (i.e., the mpeg-otspec email list) to
> be a very suitable place to conduct these discussions – we just need
> to adopt a much more thoughtful, strategic approach to things to make
> sure that we have everyone included in the discussion, and invested in
> making it a successful endeavor.
>
> We also need to be mindful about organizational boundaries (something
> I believe I already mentioned in the past). OFF work has been
> successfully conducted by ISO since 2002, and an attempt to divert a
> new font format work into a different venue would introduce an
> unwelcome conflict IMO, something that is more likely to be seen as a
> new “font war”. Given that we can develop and present a clear
> strategic reason and direction for the development of the entirely new
> font format, ISO (SC29/WG3) will definitely entertain the idea of
> taking on this new work item as well.
>
> As far as FTCG is concerned, I believe we have a well-documented
> consensus decision (expressed both in the informal meeting minutes as
> “The Font and Text Community Group gathers individuals and
> organisations to discuss and develop specifications and
> implementations for technologies such as shaping and layout which
> operate on and at the interface between text encoding and font
> formats” and in the draft charter) that the FTCG work is complementary
> to font format development. It does NOT mean that discussions there
> are limited in any way – the FTCG work will undoubtedly inform and
> influence the decisions about new font format – we just need to be
> mindful that we, in essence, have one large community of people
> participating in two closely related activities conducted by different
> entities.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Vlad
>
> *From:*mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at> *On Behalf Of
> *Roderick Sheeter
> *Sent:* Sunday, September 13, 2020 5:43 PM
> *To:* Peter Constable <pgcon6 at msn.com>
> *Cc:* mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
> *Subject:* Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Introducing breaking changes into the
> spec (was: RE: [EXTERNAL] Proposal to deprecate derived search values)
>
> It would be helpful to start by understanding what changes people want
> to make and why. One possible approach would be to simply ask people
> to post their thoughts and share links back to the group (perhaps CG
> mailing list?), inspired by the Rust call for blogs
> (https://blog.rust-lang.org/2019/10/29/A-call-for-blogs-2020.html
> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/lz6LCo20KjhXL7NGsVo1ki>).
>
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 10:02 AM Peter Constable <pgcon6 at msn.com
> <mailto:pgcon6 at msn.com>> wrote:
>
> > I really hope we’re not going to try to define some entirely new
> font format by email.
>
> Someone mentioned offline that my brief message, saying what I
> don’t want but not what I would want to see happen, might come
> across as trying to shut down discussion and block progress. I
> think that’s valid feedback, and so want to correct that with a
> brief elaboration.
>
> Clearly, my statement indicates a desire to shut down
> discussion—_/in this current mode and context/_.
>
> For one thing, I thought there had been general consensus that a
> topic like creating an entirely new format would be pending a
> discussion elsewhere (the TFCG) on what new areas of activity
> should be discussed and what the appropriate context(s) for those
> should be.
>
> Secondly, discussion was bringing up specific design details
> (dropping CFF, what OS/2 metrics are needed, how formats for
> graphic elements should be architected), which is putting the cart
> waaaaayyyy ahead of the horse: As Adam and Vlad suggested, this
> topic needs to start with a cost-benefit analysis. I’d expand that
> a bit: any work to start in this direction would need a carefully
> thought-out business case _/and/_ strategic roadmap that can
> convince a broad range of vendors, including most or all the
> majors, that there will be beneficial ROI and a feasible path to
> success that takes current realities into consideration. (Do I
> sound like a PM?) Engineering is first of all a matter of
> addressing real public or business problems or opportunities.
> Without that, technical design is nothing more than a science project.
>
> And until vendors have bought into a business case and strategic
> roadmap, talk of a _/hugely/_ disruptive change (which is what is
> being discussed) is counter-productive: at best, a noisy
> distraction; and at worst, perceived as intended to create discord
> and new font wars.
>
> I’m all for designing a new and better mousetrap, and I’d be in
> favour of discussions that explore business case and possible
> paths to success. But I don’t think this email thread is net
> helping move toward that. Let’s progress one step at a time, as
> generally agreed, in the TFCG.
>
> Peter
>
> *From:* Peter Constable
> *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2020 3:57 PM
> *To:* mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> <mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>>
> *Subject:* RE: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Introducing breaking changes into the
> spec (was: RE: [EXTERNAL] Proposal to deprecate derived search values)
>
> I really hope we’re not going to try to define some entirely new
> font format by email.
>
> Peter
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/psJ8Cn5oXgsGqJ0LSJJ-5Z>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpeg-otspec mailing list
> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec
--
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20200914/f5925eca/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the mpeg-otspec
mailing list