<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /> </head> <body><div class="auto-created-dir-div" dir="auto" style="unicode-bidi: embed;"><style>p{margin:0}</style>> <span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Your original idea of localizable sentences, as I recall, involved assigning Unicode code points to particular semantic propositions, or “sentences”.</span><div><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Yes, that was the original idea, back in 2009.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Research has continued and developed. There are several possible encodings in the research, all involve sequences: two are markup, one involves the exclamation mark and ordinary digits, the other involves an integral sign and circled digits - harder to write a message, but more robust.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">The third possible encoding needs a regular Unicode/ ISO-IEC 10646 encoding but would be unambiguous, highly robust and clearly free of concerns about proprietary rights. Yet it needs agreement from Unicode Inc. and ISO/IEC 10646 committees.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">> Unicode has stated clearly it is not interested in pursuing that idea and banned further discussion of that idea from its email lists.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Actually no. A fictional character with email address root@unicode.org banned discussion. It was not a statement by an official named officer of Unicode Inc. acting officially. So its validity is highly questionable. If Unicode Inc. wishes to ban discussion of localizable sentence technology then it could officially state that, but Unicode Inc. has not done that. No notice of disapproval for encoding localizable sentences has been made.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Rather, the banning by a fictional character is like a Unicode version of The Luxembourg Compromise.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">The fictional character did not state any reason why localizable sentences are unsuitable for encoding.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxembourg_compromise</span><br></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">I have not been given a fair opportunity to state my case and have it debated.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">QID emoji has been treated as a serious proposal and a Public Review has taken place.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">My proposal for localizable sentences being encoded is far more robust, and, I opine, should be treated seriously and assessed properly on a "sauce for pasta is sauce for rice" basis.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">So there is nothing OFFICIAL about localizable sentences from Unicode Inc. of which I am aware.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">So I keep trying to get my proposal for localizable sentences considered by Unicode Inc..</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">> I don’t think you should be trying to use this list as a back door to revisit the same idea.</span><br></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">I am not using this list as a back door. There has been a call for ideas and I have put one forward. From what you now write it appears that the 'name' table will not do what I am proposing in what, for purposes of discussion, can be called the 'text' table, because, as far as I am aware, that name is not already in use for an OpenType table.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">Also, I am entitled to try to get my invention implemented.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">So I am in favour of having the 'text' table and Peter is not, so that is 1 vote for and 1 vote against at this time.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">So the proposal goes forward and hopefully other people will express a view and a consensus will emerge.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">> </span><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">Again, there’s an unstated premise of this idea that the font will get transported with the message.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">No, there is no such premise.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">There is as far as I am aware no premise or presumption when sending any email message that a font will get transported with the message.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">My idea is that the message list will be an international standard and that localization will take place automatically in the receiving device when a language-independent encoded message is received, using a decoding list local to the recipient.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">I have recently decided that all localizable sentences that are encoded shall have a language-independent glyph - at one time I considered that glyphs were not always needed, but I have since changed my mind on this as my research has proceeded.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">I have replied to the comments made. The 'text' table would have far wider application that just localizable sentences.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">William Overington</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">Tuesday 11 May 2021</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap; display: inline !important;">.</span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">> </span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></span></p><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;"></span><br><blockquote style="margin: 0 auto; padding: 0 2em; border-left:2px solid #00ADE5; white-space: pre-wrap "><br><br>------ Original Message ------<br>From: "Peter Constable" <pconstable@microsoft.com><br>To: "William_J_G Overington" <wjgo_10009@btinternet.com>; "'MPEG OT Spec list'" <mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at>; "Peter Constable" <pgcon6@msn.com>; "Vladimir Levantovsky" <vladimir.levantovsky@gmail.com><br>Sent: Tuesday, 2021 May 11 At 17:50<br>Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] New AHG mandates and other news!<br><br> <div class="WordSection1"> <p class="MsoNormal">The ‘name’ table stores strings for various purposes. Some of these purposes are pre-defined in the spec; some examples:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <ul><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="">a family name such as “Arial”</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="">a subfamily name such as “Condensed Bold Italic”</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="">a foundry name</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="">a copyright string</li></ul> <p class="MsoNormal">But the format also allows for other strings for vendor-defined purposes. So, for instance, in variable fonts, the vendor can define instances (particular design variants) for some combination of variation axis values, and then they can define what would effectively be subfamily names for those specific instances. </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">The actual strings themselves are indexed with a two-part key that includes an ID (generally referred to as the “name ID”), which indicates the purpose (as described above), and a numeric language identifier.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">So, using vendor-specific name IDs and language IDs, you could add the kind of strings you describe into a font’s name table.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">But there isn’t any existing way to associate particular glyph sequences with a name ID. And that is the part that, in general, doesn’t have a clear need in the way that fonts are used.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">Your original idea of localizable sentences, as I recall, involved assigning Unicode code points to particular semantic propositions, or “sentences”. Unicode has stated clearly it is not interested in pursuing that idea and banned further discussion of that idea from its email lists. I don’t think you should be trying to use this list as a back door to revisit the same idea. </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">Now, what you’ve described seems to have evolved from that original idea—though only slightly: now you’re talking about glyph sequences that represent “sentences”. Based on your slide presentation, it appears you want a message containing “!313125” to get associated with a string “Is there any information about the following person please?” (along with other translations), and you want to use a font table to provide a mapping from the glyphs for the character sequence “!313125” to that string (in its various translation variants). Again, there’s an unstated premise of this idea that the font will get transported with the message. If it did, the font would have some fixed sent of translations. Why not just send a message with multiple translations? Or why not create an online registry that documents the sentences and translations in many languages, and then send as a message a URL that points to the registry entry for “!313125”?</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">For my part, I don’t see a need to add into the OpenType / OFF spec a table that provides a mapping from glyph sequences to name IDs.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">Peter</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <div style="border: none;border-top: solid rgb(181,196,223) 1.0pt;padding: 3.0pt 0.0in 0.0in 0.0in;"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;color: black;">From: </span></b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;color: black;">mpeg-otspec <<span class="wt_Email">mpeg-otspec-bounces@lists.aau.at</span><span></span>> on behalf of William_J_G Overington <<span class="wt_Email">wjgo_10009@btinternet.com</span><span></span>><br> <b>Date: </b>Tuesday, May 11, 2021 at 4:21 AM<br> <b>To: </b>'MPEG OT Spec list' <<span class="wt_Email">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</span><span></span>>, Peter Constable <<span class="wt_Email">pgcon6@msn.com</span><span></span>>, Vladimir Levantovsky <<span class="wt_Email">vladimir.levantovsky@gmail.com</span><span></span>><br> <b>Subject: </b>[EXTERNAL] Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] New AHG mandates and other news!</span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal">Thank you for replying.</p> <div> <p> </p> <p>I write to seek clarification please.</p> <div> <p> </p> <p>> You’ve described a way to organize data, but to get the functionality you described the data would be organized differently: a table that maps glyph ID sequences to string entries in the ‘name’ table.</p> <div> <p>I have found the following web page.</p> <p> </p> <p>https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/opentype/spec/name</p> <p> </p> <p>I am not an expert on OpenType, so as Peter mentions the 'name' table, is the implication that what I am suggesting is already implemented?</p> <p> </p> <p>If not, can I suggest that for this discussion that we refer to my suggestion as a proposal for a 'text' table please?</p> <p> </p> <p>I mention that use with QID emoji was just one suggested possibility and that there would be a number of other uses, even if QID emoji is never implemented. The use with QID emoji is not a central application suggestion for this proposed facility.</p> <p> </p> <p>> It seems to me like you’re trying to propose enhancements the font format to address challenges for the QID emoji proposal. </p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>No. My suggestion has various possible applications, many related to communication through the language barrier. QID emoji were not my idea, I have expressed my views about the idea in my responses to the Unicode Technical Committee's Public Review.</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>https://www.unicode.org/review/pri408/</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>My own research is mostly on localizable sentences and their applications, together with some research on The Mariposa System of abstract emoji for assisting communication through the language barrier when using emoji.</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>Although emoji are interesting, from my perspective they do not have anything like the great potential for communication through the language barrier as does the localizable sentence invention. In particular, many pictorial emoji proposals tend to be deliberately imprecise as regards meaning and implied meaning of an emoji, yet localizable sentences characters are very deliberately precise as to meaning so as to provide high provenance as to meaning in communication through the language barrier.</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ngo/</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>In particular, the following slide show was produced for the United Kingdom National Body to forward to the ISO/TC 37 committee.</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ngo/slide_show_about_localizable_sentences.pdf</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>For some recent glyph designs for The Mariposa System, please see page 5 of the following thread, starting with the fourth post on that page.</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/138654-artwork-for-greetings-cards/</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>Some readers might perhaps like the designs for some localizable sentence glyphs that are near the start of the thread.</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>William Overington</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p>Tuesday 11 May 2021</p> <p><br> <br> </p> <p> </p> <blockquote style="border: none;border-left: solid rgb(0,173,229) 1.5pt;padding: 0.0in 0.0in 0.0in 24.0pt;margin-left: 0.0in;margin-right: 0.0in;"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><br> <br> ------ Original Message ------<br> From: "Peter Constable" <<span class="wt_Email">pgcon6@msn.com</span><span></span>><br> To: "William_J_G Overington" <<span class="wt_Email">wjgo_10009@btinternet.com</span><span></span>>; "'MPEG OT Spec list'" <<span class="wt_Email">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</span><span></span>>; "Vladimir Levantovsky" <<span class="wt_Email">vladimir.levantovsky@gmail.com</span><span></span>><br> Sent: Monday, 2021 May 10 At 22:58<br> Subject: RE: [MPEG-OTSPEC] New AHG mandates and other news!</p> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="">William, </p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="">You’ve described a way to organize data, but to get the functionality you described the data would be organized differently: a table that maps glyph ID sequences to string entries in the ‘name’ table.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="">But the scenario you have in mind is to use fonts as a way to carry descriptions of Unicode character sequences, and specifically QID emoji sequences—which is an idea that has been proposed but has not been approved by Unicode. Even<i> _if</i>_ the QID emoji proposal were adopted by Unicode—and it’s far from clear that it will be—, I don’t think it’s a good idea to use fonts as a vehicle for transporting descriptions of glyph ID sequences.</p> <ul><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="">For the QID emoji sequence scenario, Unicode strings in general are sent between applications or between devices 99.99% of the time without any font data. So, it’s very unclear that it would provide much useful benefit for that scenario.</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="">If it is assumed that text containing QID emoji sequences would _<i>need</i>_ font data to be sent along with the text, then that raises a question of whether the QID proposal provides significant benefit over using PUA characters.</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="">The formats added to the font would not be inherently specific to QID sequences—that is, the design suggests a much more general usage: strings describing arbitrary glyph sequences. But I don’t see any real need for such a general mechanism.</li></ul> <p class="MsoNormal" style="">It seems to me like you’re trying to propose enhancements the font format to address challenges for the QID emoji proposal. For my part, I don’t think it’s a good idea. Fonts are not the best way to solve those problems. If Unicode is going to consider the QID proposal, then proponents of the proposal need to come up with better ways to address any shortcomings in the proposal.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="">Peter</p> <div> <div style="border: none;border-top: solid rgb(225,225,225) 1.0pt;padding: 3.0pt 0.0in 0.0in 0.0in;"> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b>From:</b> mpeg-otspec <<span class="wtemail"><span class="wt_Email">mpeg-otspec-bounces@lists.aau.at</span><span></span></span>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>William_J_G Overington<br> <b>Sent:</b> May 6, 2021 8:34 AM<br> <b>To:</b> 'MPEG OT Spec list' <<span class="wtemail"><span class="wt_Email">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</span><span></span></span>>; Vladimir Levantovsky <<span class="wtemail"><span class="wt_Email">vladimir.levantovsky@gmail.com</span><span></span></span>><br> <b>Subject:</b> Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] New AHG mandates and other news!</p> </div> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="">> As part of the mandate #2, we are also encouraged to start exploration activities to discuss the next round of changes that will become the basis for the new OFF 5<sup>th</sup> edition work item – your contributions to these topics (both on this list and / or new issues on <a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FMPEGGroup%2FOpenFontFormat&data=04%7C01%7Cpconstable%40microsoft.com%7Cfe51c13919584abc23dd08d9146ec3d0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637563288688874579%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Slzh2fSOikrSWx%2F0HhjBIhycZjbUfbMoSWvUkFQ22xA%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"> MPEGGroup/OpenFontFormat GitHub</a>) are much appreciated.</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"> </p> <p>Would it be good to have a new table which is similar in structure to a GSUB table but which can have in the part to the left of each -> either one postscript name or a sequence of postscript names and to the right of each -> a string of Unicode text characters in UTF-16 format - that is, a string of text characters as one might have in, say, a computer program written in Pascal, for the avoidance of doubt specifically not a sequence of postscript names.</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"> </p> <p>I am thinking that this could have various uses, for example, for text to speech in a language of the font designer's choice, transliteration, on-screen explanation of emoji - including perhaps the potentially millions of QID emoji that may soon become encoded into Unicode, so that a font that supports just a few QID emoji could also include an explanation of them in a language of the font designer's choice. The output of the table could be used for any of screen display, tooltip display, speech output. The use of the table in a font would be optional and could be simply ignored by an application that does not support it: also an application that does support the use of the information that is in the table could have a button to switch that use on or off.</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"> </p> <p>William Overington</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"> </p> <p>Thursday 6 May 2021</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"> </p> </div> </div> </blockquote> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote></div></div></body></html>