WebFonts Working Group Teleconference -- 17 Nov 2010

<trackbot> Date: 17 November 2010

Vlad: EPUB list conversation took place that WOFF is redundant for EPUB.

<ChrisL> scribenick: cslye

Vlad: Font solutions are fragmented; thinks WOFF is best solution.
... Many list members are undecided.

What is the list?

<ChrisL> http://openebook.org/

Vlad: List is: epub@openebook.org

I will talk to the Adobe person about it.

jdaggett: EPUB font is embedded, not linked.

<ChrisL> We would like woff to be ubiquitous though, and we would like epub to deviate from Web standarfds as little as possible

Vlad: If the font data is packaged inside the file, it's embedded, and linking is not embedded.

<ChrisL> its not embedded in the sense of being part of the same document file

ChrisL: Saving web pages: Don't want EPUB to deviate too much from that.

jdaggett: I don't see where we need to say explicitly that any particular font should be used in EPUB. Can recommend WOFF, though.

<John> [Sorry. There seems to besomething wrong with my phone.]

Vlad: EPUB has a "mangled font" algorithm that was optional.
... WOFF is a better solution since it has more support and has metadata.

jdaggett: That's a dumb requirement.

sergeym: The spec wants to avoid moving a font from one EPUB to aother.

Vlad: I'm not concerned about users with proper license.

sergeym: Just clarifying what the spec actually says.
... (The EPUB spec.)

Vlad: WOFF informs the user.
... Keep honest people honest.
... Moving on...

First agenda item: Review open action items.

<scribe> ACTION: 29 to FAQ. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 29

<ChrisL> action-29?

<trackbot> ACTION-29 -- John Hudson to review woff faq with chris and vlad -- due 2010-10-06 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/29

action-36?

<trackbot> ACTION-36 -- Chris Lilley to recategorise the general conformance criteria -- due 2010-11-11 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/36

Can be closed.

action-37?

<trackbot> ACTION-37 -- Chris Lilley to get cracking on test suite. -- due 2010-11-11 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/37

<ChrisL> close action-36

<trackbot> ACTION-36 Recategorise the general conformance criteria closed

close action-37

<trackbot> ACTION-37 Get cracking on test suite. closed

<ChrisL> action-38?

<trackbot> ACTION-38 -- John Daggett to help with font creation for the test suite. -- due 2010-11-11 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/38

We will review Tal's test suite stuff today

Vlad: Should we keep it open?

<jdaggett> yeah, closing it sounds fine

ChrisL: Close it and make a more specific action.

close action-38

<trackbot> ACTION-38 Help with font creation for the test suite. closed

action-43?

<trackbot> ACTION-43 -- Jonathan Kew to clarify that @id on uniqueid is required -- due 2010-11-17 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/43

close action-43

<trackbot> ACTION-43 Clarify that @id on uniqueid is required closed

action-44?

<trackbot> ACTION-44 -- Jonathan Kew to clarify schema language in text to say one or more text elements -- due 2010-11-17 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/44

close action-44

<trackbot> ACTION-44 Clarify schema language in text to say one or more text elements closed

close action-45

<trackbot> ACTION-45 Make item element a required chilkd of extension closed

action-46?

<trackbot> ACTION-46 -- Chris Lilley to add the two missing conformance statements and split out the stylesheet -- due 2010-11-17 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/track/actions/46

ChrisL: They were added. Can be closed.

close action-46

<trackbot> ACTION-46 Add the two missing conformance statements and split out the stylesheet closed

close action-47

<trackbot> ACTION-47 Edit the media registration to say application/font-woff closed

ChrisL: Was done in accordance with Last Call.

<ChrisL> the general ones are here

<ChrisL> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/wiki/TestPlan-General#Test_Plan_-_General

ChrisL: Leave untestable things as lowercase 'must'?
... Take untestable things out of conformance spec.
... Just recommend testing them.

jdaggett: Just mark what's not testable.

ChrisL: I agree, but...
... Following CSS3 font spec is hard to test.

jdaggett: Benefit to leaving CSS3 requirement is useful, though.

Vlad: Better to keep these things in the spec, even if they're difficult/impossible to test.
... Let's review the test plans along with looking at Tal's stuff.

Tal: Python script generates valid and invalid WOFF.
... Link them to testable assertions.
... Should I eliminate tests that aren't tied specifically to testable assertions?

ChrisL: NO NO NO!

Tal: Tricky to make a font that has only one thing wrong.
... I have a dump of test cases I have now.

<ChrisL> ref as in reference

jdaggett: Ref test compares two documents; can be automated.
... Alternate test shows PASS/FAIL, when a reference is not available.
... Let's have both kinds of tests.

Tal: Keep the sfnt as simple as possible; with single character?

sergeym: Existing test fonts work fine; we don't need something new.

<tal> http://wofftesttemp.typesupply.com/UA-Tests/useragenttestindex.html

Tal: Ref tests use a raw font for comparison.

Better to use an installed font, instead of linked?

jdaggett: Have an installed fallback font to use as a flag, to indicate that fonts are loading properly.

Vlad: Create a font with mis-mapped characters, so that "PASS" = "FAIL"

<jdaggett> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/xhtml1/font-family-name-003.xht

<ChrisL> Text fotr a 'must load' test is 'FAIL" and the font has P glyph for F etc so it looks like'PASS' when loaded

<jdaggett> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/xhtml1/font-family-name-ref.xht

<jdaggett> those are examples of a reftest that uses

<jdaggett> the sort of thing we're talking about

sergeym: We need to show when fonts don't load at all. Need separate font for that?

jdaggett: We have all this already.

<ChrisL> Text for a 'must not load' test is 'PASS" and the font has F glyph for P etc so it looks like 'FAIL' when erroneously loaded

tal: Some testable assertions test file format. Should a UA test pass even if file format is invalid?
... Checksums - validator will fail bad checksums, but UA should pass.
... Need test case for UA where checksums are bad, but UA will pass it.

Vlad: Don't see why we need this test.

jdaggett: We don't want UAs to be required to fail it, but they can if they want.

Vlad: Do we have tests for UA with bad metadata?

tal: I will add some of these edge cases that aren't there.

<ChrisL> ACTION: Tal to create UA test for bad metadata [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-48 - Create UA test for bad metadata [on Tal Leming - due 2010-11-24].

<scribe> ACTION: Tal to update UA test plan to include new "fringe" tests. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-49 - Update UA test plan to include new "fringe" tests. [on Tal Leming - due 2010-11-24].

tal: What if padding is done with something other than null bytes?

<scribe> ACTION: Tal to update font format test plan to include new "fringe" tests. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/17-webfonts-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-50 - Update font format test plan to include new "fringe" tests. [on Tal Leming - due 2010-11-24].

tal: Please give me comments and suggestions on test plan.

- DRAFT -

WebFonts Working Group Teleconference

17 Nov 2010

Attendees

Contents

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output