[MPEG-OTSPEC] [EXTERNAL] WD review and input contribution deadline

[Peter Constable]

Thanks, Vlad.

Glad to hear you anticipated more time in WD mode as I have contributions to submit and wasn’t able to get to them today. This week is busy as I’m chairing the quarterly Unicode Technical Committee meeting.


Peter

From: Vladimir Levantovsky <vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com>
Date: Monday, April 18, 2022 at 9:29 PM
To: Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com>, 'MPEG OT Spec list' <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
Subject: RE: [MPEG-OTSPEC] [EXTERNAL] WD review and input contribution deadline
Peter, all,

I am not expecting (and will not be supporting) advancing the 5th edition WD to CD at this time – there are many other changes that need to be introduced and discussed, and I agree that the document isn’t ready for promotion.

Re renumbering of subclauses of 6.3.3 – while transforming the 4th edition document to the new ISO House Style I discovered that the final published version of 4th edition had a bug that caused one subclause to be corrupted, and there were general inconsistencies with how content was structured. The current draft reflects changes I made to fix both editorial issues.

Re: Amd. 1 changes – I believe I introduced all of them exactly as they are presented, I will have to verify it again – I do have intermediate versions of the WD document stored after every batch of changes was made (Amd.1, Amd.1+2, post-Amd.2).

Thank you for conducting a thorough review, really appreciate it.
Vlad


From: Peter Constable [mailto:pconstable at microsoft.com]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 7:57 PM
To: Vladimir Levantovsky <vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com>; 'MPEG OT Spec list' <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
Subject: Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] [EXTERNAL] WD review and input contribution deadline

Vlad:

I wasn’t expecting to have to review whether this WD accurately reflects changes in Amds 1 and 2. I’m still reviewing Amd 1 and seeing significant issues. So, I hope you weren’t counting on advancing the WD to CD: it’s not ready!

The subclauses of 6.3.3 appear to have been renumbered. I don’t have a problem with that change, but it’s not reflected in the change tracking of the WD.

Re 6.3.3.3.3 (prev. 6.3.3.2): Amd 1 made a revision to this section by inserting paragraphs after the first paragraph. However, it did not alter the first paragraph, nor did Amd 2. So that first paragraph should be as in the 4th edn. However, in the WD, that first paragraph appears after the inserted paragraphs and is being deleted. It needs to be restored as the first paragraph.In


In 6.4.2: Amd 1 replaced the text of the sixth paragraph. This is not reflected in the WD.



Peter

From: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at>> on behalf of Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com<mailto:pconstable at microsoft.com>>
Date: Monday, April 18, 2022 at 4:11 PM
To: Vladimir Levantovsky <vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com<mailto:vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com>>, 'MPEG OT Spec list' <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>>
Subject: Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] [EXTERNAL] WD review and input contribution deadline
Further on 5.5.7 — this time I’ll review the whole thing before sending.

In Amd 1, the text for example 3 was to have the following inserted:

“The visual result is the same as that shown for Example 2.”

That insertion is reflected in the WD.

However, the 4th edition did not include a figure / visual for the second example. It said, “The diagram is the same as in the above example.” (That’s not great wording since it’s not clear what is meant by “the diagram”.) And Amd 1 did not insert a figure for example 2.

I suggest that a figure should be added for example 2 for clarity. (This is what is done in the OT spec<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Ftypography%2Fopentype%2Fspec%2Fsvg%23example-2-glyph-specified-directly-in-expected-position&data=05%7C01%7Cpconstable%40microsoft.com%7Cb30d4014aa6446653aeb08da21bca037%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637859393983165072%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=R4%2FTkSvTOE%2BlZ8gaL6o1wGx4jukFjibcrFyUYHsyM0I%3D&reserved=0>.) So, insert at the end of example 2:


The following image shows the visual result:

[Colour glyph for lower case i with a gradient fill]

In the text for example 5, there is a typo:

“The following image illustrate visual results…”

Change “illustrate” to “illustrates”.


For example 7, Amd 1 inserted the following after the code block:

“The following image shows the visual result:”

This is missing from the WD.



Peter


From: Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com<mailto:pconstable at microsoft.com>>
Date: Monday, April 18, 2022 at 3:13 PM
To: Vladimir Levantovsky <vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com<mailto:vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com>>, 'MPEG OT Spec list' <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>>
Subject: Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] [EXTERNAL] WD review and input contribution deadline
Sent too soon:

The remainder of that portion of the changes in Amd 1 also are not reflected. The second paragraph of 5.5.7 (was 5.5.6) was supposed to be revised. Change

“… an OFF font with SVG glyph outlines.”

To

“… an OFF font with SVG glyph descriptions.”


Peter

From: Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com<mailto:pconstable at microsoft.com>>
Date: Monday, April 18, 2022 at 3:10 PM
To: Vladimir Levantovsky <vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com<mailto:vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com>>, 'MPEG OT Spec list' <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>>
Subject: Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] [EXTERNAL] WD review and input contribution deadline
It’s evident to me now that the changes reflected in the WD do include changes in Amd 1 and Amd 2.

In Amd 1, the first two paragraphs of 5.5.7 (was 5.5.6) were replaced. However, the first of those paragraphs is still retained in the WD:

“”SVG glyph descriptions must be defined…”

The content of that paragraph is redundant: the relevant points are covered in 5.5.5. That paragraph should be deleted from the WD.


Peter

From: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at>> on behalf of Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com<mailto:pconstable at microsoft.com>>
Date: Monday, April 18, 2022 at 2:30 PM
To: Vladimir Levantovsky <vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com<mailto:vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com>>, 'MPEG OT Spec list' <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>>
Subject: Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] [EXTERNAL] WD review and input contribution deadline
Vlad:

Do the changes shown by change tracking reflect changes in Amd 1 and Amd 2, or only new changes post Amd 2?

From: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at>> on behalf of Vladimir Levantovsky <vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com<mailto:vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com>>
Date: Monday, April 4, 2022 at 10:41 PM
To: 'MPEG OT Spec list' <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at<mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [MPEG-OTSPEC] WD review and input contribution deadline
Dear AHG members,

The text of the new, 5th edition Working Draft of ISO/IEC 14496-22 “Open Font Format” is available for public review and can downloaded using the following link: https://www.mpeg.org/wp-content/uploads/mpeg_meetings/137_OnLine/w21212.zip<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mpeg.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fmpeg_meetings%2F137_OnLine%2Fw21212.zip&data=05%7C01%7Cpconstable%40microsoft.com%7Cb30d4014aa6446653aeb08da21bca037%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637859393983165072%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=MdPTxYeMbrU%2BTw5lVc2Sd1ik7ffggvZoaNjUoSwIvEo%3D&reserved=0>. Please also note that any additional changes need to be submitted for discussion at the next WG3 meeting, which will take place on April 25-29. The deadline for submission of the input contributions is April 18th.

Thank you,
Vladimir


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20220419/278c2f92/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8248 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20220419/278c2f92/attachment-0001.png>