[MPEG-OTSPEC] [EXTERNAL] RE: FYI: OpenType 1.9 beta

[Vladimir Levantovsky]

Peter, 

You can separate the issues that are require substantive changes from those that are purely editorial, and then group them together in multiple input contributions (by topic, by subclause, etc) like it was done for CFF2, where contents of one subclause and two annexes were restructured and combined in a single contribution. 

I cannot make structural changes in the text of the standard on a whim, we need to follow an established ISO process. 

Thank you,
Vlad

> On Apr 6, 2022, at 11:40 AM, Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Vlad:
>  
> You didn’t respond to my question, which is of more concern to me: how would you suggest I compile an input contribution that covers almost 300 issues?
>  
>  
> Peter
>  
> From: Vladimir Levantovsky <vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:47 PM
> To: Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com>
> Cc: MPEG OT Spec list <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: [MPEG-OTSPEC] FYI: OpenType 1.9 beta
> 
> Hi Peter,
>  
> There are certain changes that indeed can be considered purely editorial - typos, clarification and restructuring individual sentences for clarity would be suitable examples of such changes. 
>  
> However, when you would like to make more substantive changes, such as structural changes that rearrange content of sub clauses, they need to be presented and reviewed by the WG. A good, very recent example of such change would be the content of CFF2 table description (sub clause 5.4.3). The revised text didn’t introduce technical changes but due to substantial rewrite and restructuring of the text, it was proposed as input contribution and then adopted as part of this new 5th edition Working Draft.
>  
> We need to follow the same path for all structural changes, even though if a change isn’t technical and doesn’t affect conformance. 
> 
> Thank you,
> Vlad
> 
> 
> On Apr 5, 2022, at 1:11 PM, Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Vlad:
>  
> I think I’d consider the structural changes to be editorial in nature. (E.g., conformance was not affected by those changes.) Of course, they were not minor edits.
>  
> All of the changes to the OT spec not reflected in Amd 2 were addressing a number of issues reported against the spec:
>  
> 1.8.4: Issues · MicrosoftDocs/typography-issues (github.com) (count: 236)
> Post 1.8.4 errata: Issues · MicrosoftDocs/typography-issues (github.com) (count: 2)
> 1.9: Issues · MicrosoftDocs/typography-issues (github.com) (count: 56)
>  
> How would you suggest I compile an input contribution for all of that?
>  
> From: Vladimir Levantovsky <vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com>
> Date: Monday, March 28, 2022 at 2:00 PM
> To: Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com>, 'MPEG OT Spec list' <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [MPEG-OTSPEC] FYI: OpenType 1.9 beta
> 
> Peter, all,
>  
> I would like to note that a large number of substantial changes were made in the two last updates of OpenType specification, versions 1.8.4 and 1.9. While major updates (COLR v1) have been discussed and implemented in both OT and OFF texts, there are many additional changes that introduced text updates that go beyond merely editorial changes. Some parts of the OT spec were subjected to restructuring that, although they did not introduce technical changes, caused significant deviation in the language of the current OT chapters and OFF text.
>  
> In order to implement these changes and synchronize the text of the 5th edition Working Draft OFF text with OT 1.8.4 and 1.9 updates, the updates will need to be submitted as input contributions.
>  
> Thank you,
> Vladimir
>  
>  
> From: mpeg-otspec [mailto:mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at] On Behalf Of Peter Constable
> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 1:31 AM
> To: 'MPEG OT Spec list' <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
> Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] FYI: OpenType 1.9 beta
>  
> A beta for OpenType 1.9 has been published for two-week public review. This version aligns to the CDAM of OFF Amendment 2 with the introduction of a significant enhancement for colour fonts: a second version of the COLR table (version 1).
>  
> The new COLR version provide support for gradients and other capabilities in vector colour fonts; the capabilities are very similar to those in SVG Native but can be used in applications that do not have or (for whatever reasons) cannot add support SVG. The new COLR version also provides greater integration with font variations—something that is not supported at all with OT-SVG. The COLR enhancements were designed jointly with Google, who have been implementing support in the FontTools project, the Skia and Freetype libraries, and in Chrome. It can be tested already in the Chrome Canary builds by browsing to chrome://flags/#colr-v1-fonts to enable the feature. Sample fonts using COLR v1 (with OT-SVG equivalents for comparison) are available at https://github.com/googlefonts/color-fonts. 
> OpenType 1.9 also addresses a number of feedback items that have been reported on the OpenType spec. Among the more significant technical improvements are clarifications of several items related to TrueType outlines and the TrueType hinting language. These are changes that will be submitted to SC29 as proposed changes for a new edition of OFF.
> 
> The landing page for the beta is at https://docs.microsoft.com/typography/opentype/otspec190/ot190beta. The public review period will end November 26, and the new OT version will be published shortly after that.
>  
>  
> Peter Constable
>  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20220406/059cec94/attachment.html>