<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3c.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/loose.dtd">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16809" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff">
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>Thank you Sairus for presenting your
proposal.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>All, please notice that the corrected link to the
uploaded file is </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2><SPAN class=098092114-09042009><A
href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mpeg-OTspec/files/lastResortFonts_AdobeProposal.doc"><U><FONT
color=#0000ff size=2><FONT color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
lang=EN>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mpeg-OTspec/files/lastResortFonts_AdobeProposal.doc</U></FONT></FONT></SPAN></A><FONT
size=2> </DIV></FONT></SPAN></FONT>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>I would urge all AHG members to review the proposal
from Adobe and provide your feedback and any objections to it no later than
Monday, April 13th. The deadline for input contribution to the WG11 meeting is
April 14th.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>The proposal addresses important subject of backward
compatibility with the existing font engines, and helps insure that processing
of fonts implementing newly introduced functionality (cmap format 13) will not
affect existing rasterizers.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>Sairus, I have some questions and comments regarding
your proposal:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>1) My understanding is that by introducing the new
encoding ID = 6 we will provide a clear indication that a font may be developed
using new cmap format 13, in addition to any other cmap formats defined in the
previous versions of the specification. You also proposed to use bit 14 of the
'head' table to indicate that the glyphs encoded in the cmap subtables do not
truly represent the encoded code points.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>Question:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>Is it your intention that</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>- when bit 14 is set to '1' it indicates that the
<STRONG>all </STRONG>code points encoded in a font are not truly
represented, and the font can only be used as a last resort font,
while</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>- when bit 14 is set to '0' it would mean that any cmap
subtable format can be used by a font, and that a font may contain a mix of
glyphs, some of them providing true representation of encoded code points and
other glyphs used as a "last resort" glyphs for particular ranges of code
points?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>If this is true, it seems that the use of bit 14 may be
redundant, since the new Encoding ID = 6 would clearly differentiate a font that
can use any cmap subtable format, including format 13. It seems likely that most
fonts would use different subtable formats (including format 13 for unsupported
code points), and that in rare circumstances a font may only provide cmap format
13 subtable as a last resort. However, I don't see why we would need to flag
this font. Existing font engines would likely not bother checking this new flag
and the new rasterizers will be able to properly handle the font with the
support for the new Encoding ID.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>2) I think that providing historical references to
previous versions of the OpenType specification as part of the Encoding ID
descriptions would be detrimental to the readability of the OFF spec. I suggest
that we should rather stick with the established naming conventions of
different Encoding IDs. I propose that we should add new row in the Encoding ID
table with the value = 6 and the description field "Unicode 5.0 and onward
semantics, Unicode full repertoire", and leave all other description fields
unchanged. This description would provide distinct meaning for the new ID,
and at the same time can be used to encode cmap table encoding
records.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>Thank you,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009>Vladimir</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=098092114-09042009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Sairus
Patel<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, April 09, 2009 12:24 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
mpeg-OTspec@yahoogroups.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [mpeg-OTspec] Proposal related
to Last Resort fonts<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<P>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'">I’ve discussed the
concepts in the following Adobe proposal with various interested parties,
including MS and Apple, on an off-list thread:<O></O></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'"><A
href="http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/mpeg-OTspec/files/lastResortFont_AdobeProposal.doc">http://tech.<WBR>groups.yahoo.<WBR>com/group/<WBR>mpeg-OTspec/<WBR>files/lastResort<WBR>Font_AdobePropos<WBR>al.doc</A><O></O></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'"><O></O></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'">I think it will very
nicely allow for “Last Resort” fonts and cmap subtable format 13 to fit
cleanly into the OpenType/OFF specifications.<O></O></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'"><O></O></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'">Since this proposal
has Apple’s LastResort.ttf in mind (this is a Snow Leopard pre-release font),
Adobe would like it to be introduced as an amendment to the OFF standard at
the next WG11 meeting (April 19-24). Thus, please review it at your earliest
convenience.<O></O></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'"><O></O></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'">Best,<O></O></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'">Sairus<O></O></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Georgia','serif'"><O></O></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P></P></DIV><!--End group email --></BODY></HTML>