From behdad at behdad.org Sat Oct 3 00:30:22 2026 From: behdad at behdad.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2026 16:30:22 -0600 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] VARC issues with the published OFF 5th ed Message-ID: Hello everyone, Thank you, Vlad, and everyone else who worked in the past four years to get the boring-expansion proposals into the ISO OFF 5th ed. Since the PDF became freely available on Monday, I've been busy cross-checking my implementations against the spec. Generally things are holding up well, but unfortunately I discovered three issues in the VARC table that I recommend fixing in the spec. Details and recommendation in the github issues: *1. VARC ConditionList: restore omitted uint32 conditionCount* This one is was lost in translation from my working design to the ISO proposal. It's currently impossible to implement the ISO spec, because it defines an array without defining its length anywhere: https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/176 *2. VARC: make SparseVariationRegion axis offsets table-relative and correct its designation* This was was a mistake from the review modifications of the table format to promote a struct to a table, but this was not done properly. Offsets should be relative to the beginning of their table, not the grandparent table as currently speced. https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/177 *3. VARC: Remove the exception to ordinary LSB/origin alignment for components* This is a design leftover from when I had encoded the variable-composites in the `glyf` table. In that design, the recommendation made sense. In a separate `VARC` table, it doesn't, and hinders implementation. This change wouldn't affect properly-made fonts (lsb=xMin). https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/173 That's it for now. I will be spending a lot more time with the spec, but I don't expect other major issues to arise. Thanks, behdad http://behdad.org/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From behdad at behdad.org Sat Oct 3 02:58:19 2026 From: behdad at behdad.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2026 18:58:19 -0600 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Permit the zero-coordinate fast path for malformed variation regions Message-ID: I have a minor proposal to make: relax the implementation behavior of invalid variation regions, or specifically change the behavior from scalar=1 to scalar=0. This does *not* affect any valid fonts. https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/178 behdad http://behdad.org/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcrossland at google.com Sat Oct 3 03:17:57 2026 From: dcrossland at google.com (Dave Crossland) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2026 18:17:57 -0700 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] VARC issues with the published OFF 5th ed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for flagging these, Behdad. Glad to see you're cross-checking the implementations already. Vlad, sounds like this is enough to Kickoff a 1st amendment :) if so, what would you for cast as an overall end to end timeline? -- [image: GDP logo] Dave Crossland Font Expert Google Design Platform On Fri, Oct 2, 2026, 3:30?PM Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > Hello everyone, > > Thank you, Vlad, and everyone else who worked in the past four years to > get the boring-expansion proposals into the ISO OFF 5th ed. > > Since the PDF became freely available on Monday, I've been busy > cross-checking my implementations against the spec. Generally things are > holding up well, but unfortunately I discovered three issues in the VARC > table that I recommend fixing in the spec. Details and recommendation in > the github issues: > > > *1. VARC ConditionList: restore omitted uint32 conditionCount* > This one is was lost in translation from my working design to the ISO > proposal. It's currently impossible to implement the ISO spec, because it > defines an array without defining its length anywhere: > > https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/176 > > *2. VARC: make SparseVariationRegion axis offsets table-relative and > correct its designation* > > This was was a mistake from the review modifications of the table format > to promote a struct to a table, but this was not done properly. Offsets > should be relative to the beginning of their table, not the grandparent > table as currently speced. > > https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/177 > > *3. VARC: Remove the exception to ordinary LSB/origin alignment for > components* > > This is a design leftover from when I had encoded the variable-composites > in the `glyf` table. In that design, the recommendation made sense. In a > separate `VARC` table, it doesn't, and hinders implementation. This change > wouldn't affect properly-made fonts (lsb=xMin). > > https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/173 > > > That's it for now. I will be spending a lot more time with the spec, but I > don't expect other major issues to arise. > > Thanks, > behdad > http://behdad.org/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From behdad at behdad.org Sat Oct 3 06:50:54 2026 From: behdad at behdad.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2026 22:50:54 -0600 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Clarify DMAP glyph-zero fallback Message-ID: Minor clarification of existing behavior: https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/pull/179 behdad http://behdad.org/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com Sat Oct 3 18:54:17 2026 From: vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com (Vladimir Levantovsky) Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2026 12:54:17 -0400 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] VARC issues with the published OFF 5th ed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From behdad at behdad.org Sat Oct 3 23:27:49 2026 From: behdad at behdad.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2026 15:27:49 -0600 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] VARC issues with the published OFF 5th ed In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: Thanks Vlad, What would be the deadline to submit contribution for the October 19-24 meeting? I'm hoping that we can get away with a corrigendum. behdad http://behdad.org/ On Sat, Oct 3, 2026 at 10:54?AM Vladimir Levantovsky < vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Behdad, all, > > To start the process of making corrections, it would be ideal if you > prepare an input contribution for the upcoming SC29/WG3 meeting that will > be held on October 19-24. > > Depending on the amount and the severity of proposed changes, we can > decide whether issuing a corrigendum would be a suitable option, or if it > requires an amendment. A corrigendum would be quicker path forward; an > amendment would have to follow the typical path of WD - CD/PDAM - FDAM > (with ballots issued at every stage), before it is finalized and published. > > Thank you, > Vladimir > > On Oct 2, 2026, at 9:18?PM, Dave Crossland wrote: > > ? > Thanks for flagging these, Behdad. Glad to see you're cross-checking the > implementations already. > > Vlad, sounds like this is enough to Kickoff a 1st amendment :) if so, what > would you for cast as an overall end to end timeline? > > > -- > [image: GDP logo] > > > Dave Crossland > > Font Expert > > Google Design Platform > > > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2026, 3:30?PM Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> Thank you, Vlad, and everyone else who worked in the past four years to >> get the boring-expansion proposals into the ISO OFF 5th ed. >> >> Since the PDF became freely available on Monday, I've been busy >> cross-checking my implementations against the spec. Generally things are >> holding up well, but unfortunately I discovered three issues in the VARC >> table that I recommend fixing in the spec. Details and recommendation in >> the github issues: >> >> >> *1. VARC ConditionList: restore omitted uint32 conditionCount* >> This one is was lost in translation from my working design to the ISO >> proposal. It's currently impossible to implement the ISO spec, because it >> defines an array without defining its length anywhere: >> >> https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/176 >> >> *2. VARC: make SparseVariationRegion axis offsets table-relative and >> correct its designation* >> >> This was was a mistake from the review modifications of the table format >> to promote a struct to a table, but this was not done properly. Offsets >> should be relative to the beginning of their table, not the grandparent >> table as currently speced. >> >> https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/177 >> >> *3. VARC: Remove the exception to ordinary LSB/origin alignment for >> components* >> >> This is a design leftover from when I had encoded the variable-composites >> in the `glyf` table. In that design, the recommendation made sense. In a >> separate `VARC` table, it doesn't, and hinders implementation. This change >> wouldn't affect properly-made fonts (lsb=xMin). >> >> https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/173 >> >> >> That's it for now. I will be spending a lot more time with the spec, but >> I don't expect other major issues to arise. >> >> Thanks, >> behdad >> http://behdad.org/ >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com Sun Oct 4 16:03:37 2026 From: vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com (Vladimir Levantovsky) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2026 10:03:37 -0400 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] VARC issues with the published OFF 5th ed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1DEB66F9-8B6A-459C-8C8C-95F522387FC7@gmail.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcrossland at google.com Mon Oct 5 02:34:17 2026 From: dcrossland at google.com (Dave Crossland) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2026 18:34:17 -0600 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] VARC issues with the published OFF 5th ed In-Reply-To: <1DEB66F9-8B6A-459C-8C8C-95F522387FC7@gmail.com> References: <1DEB66F9-8B6A-459C-8C8C-95F522387FC7@gmail.com> Message-ID: Smaller and faster the better imo :) On Sun, Oct 4, 2026, 8:03?AM Vladimir Levantovsky < vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com> wrote: > Input contribution deadlines are October 12 for registration and October > 13 for submission. > > Thank you, > Vlad > > On Oct 3, 2026, at 5:28?PM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > > ? > Thanks Vlad, > > What would be the deadline to submit contribution for the October 19-24 > meeting? > > I'm hoping that we can get away with a corrigendum. > > behdad > http://behdad.org/ > > > On Sat, Oct 3, 2026 at 10:54?AM Vladimir Levantovsky < > vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Behdad, all, >> >> To start the process of making corrections, it would be ideal if you >> prepare an input contribution for the upcoming SC29/WG3 meeting that will >> be held on October 19-24. >> >> Depending on the amount and the severity of proposed changes, we can >> decide whether issuing a corrigendum would be a suitable option, or if it >> requires an amendment. A corrigendum would be quicker path forward; an >> amendment would have to follow the typical path of WD - CD/PDAM - FDAM >> (with ballots issued at every stage), before it is finalized and published. >> >> Thank you, >> Vladimir >> >> On Oct 2, 2026, at 9:18?PM, Dave Crossland wrote: >> >> ? >> Thanks for flagging these, Behdad. Glad to see you're cross-checking the >> implementations already. >> >> Vlad, sounds like this is enough to Kickoff a 1st amendment :) if so, >> what would you for cast as an overall end to end timeline? >> >> >> -- >> [image: GDP logo] >> >> >> Dave Crossland >> >> Font Expert >> >> Google Design Platform >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2026, 3:30?PM Behdad Esfahbod wrote: >> >>> Hello everyone, >>> >>> Thank you, Vlad, and everyone else who worked in the past four years to >>> get the boring-expansion proposals into the ISO OFF 5th ed. >>> >>> Since the PDF became freely available on Monday, I've been busy >>> cross-checking my implementations against the spec. Generally things are >>> holding up well, but unfortunately I discovered three issues in the VARC >>> table that I recommend fixing in the spec. Details and recommendation in >>> the github issues: >>> >>> >>> *1. VARC ConditionList: restore omitted uint32 conditionCount* >>> This one is was lost in translation from my working design to the ISO >>> proposal. It's currently impossible to implement the ISO spec, because it >>> defines an array without defining its length anywhere: >>> >>> https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/176 >>> >>> *2. VARC: make SparseVariationRegion axis offsets table-relative and >>> correct its designation* >>> >>> This was was a mistake from the review modifications of the table format >>> to promote a struct to a table, but this was not done properly. Offsets >>> should be relative to the beginning of their table, not the grandparent >>> table as currently speced. >>> >>> https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/177 >>> >>> *3. VARC: Remove the exception to ordinary LSB/origin alignment for >>> components* >>> >>> This is a design leftover from when I had encoded the >>> variable-composites in the `glyf` table. In that design, the recommendation >>> made sense. In a separate `VARC` table, it doesn't, and hinders >>> implementation. This change wouldn't affect properly-made fonts (lsb=xMin). >>> >>> https://github.com/harfbuzz/boring-expansion-spec/issues/173 >>> >>> >>> That's it for now. I will be spending a lot more time with the spec, but >>> I don't expect other major issues to arise. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> behdad >>> http://behdad.org/ >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com Thu Oct 15 18:06:29 2026 From: vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com (Vladimir Levantovsky) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2026 12:06:29 -0400 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Input contribution for the next SC29/WG3 meeting Message-ID: Dear all, I want to bring your attention to the fact that an input contribution m78796 "Proposed technical corrections and clarifications to ISO/IEC 14496-22:2026 "Open Font Format" has been submitted for consideration ath the next WG3 meeting: https://dms.mpeg.expert/doc_end_user/documents/156_Hangzhou/wg11/m78796-v1-m78796.zip Once the break-out group meeting schedule has been finalized, it will be added to the WG meeting calendar. I expect the Font BoG session be scheduled early next week on Tuesday, Oct. 20. Thank you, Vladimir -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 18:20:35 2026 From: vladimir.levantovsky at gmail.com (Vladimir Levantovsky) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2026 12:20:35 -0400 Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Input contribution for the next SC29/WG3 meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52C9F171-D574-4D51-ACF8-976DA66AEEA6@gmail.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: icon.png Type: image/png Size: 55445 bytes Desc: not available URL: