Updates to current 2015 spec #8
Comments
|
Hi HinTak, |
|
Hi Hin Tak, |
|
I'll look at the otc issue soon; that shouldn't be hard. BTW, windows doesn't do otc (nor otf's), hence the CFF tests aren't implemented; we have a new FreeType backend so we are not limited by windows. CFF table test is just a big TODO. Is there any other source of an example besides adobe open sans? |
|
I believe there isn’t other otc font besides source han sans.
This format is brand new and only AFDKO can manipulate this kind of format.
If I find another otc font I will send to You.
Sami
From: HinTak
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 3:45 PM
To: Microsoft/Font-Validator
Cc: samiartur
Subject: Re: [Font-Validator] Updates to current 2015 spec (#8)
I'll look at the otc issue soon; that shouldn't be hard. BTW, windows doesn't do otc (nor otf's), hence the CFF tests aren't implemented; we have a new FreeType backend so we are not limited by windows. CFF table test is just a big TODO. Is there any other source of an example besides adobe open sans?
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
|
|
isn't |
|
The otc breakage is embarrassing - my fault. In my previous change to fix a issue where digital signature of a ttc get mis-identified as garbage of the last table of the last member font, I completely broke testing of ttc without signature.
digital signature in a ttc is definitely a strange beast - it is a table outside of the sfnt table accounting.
So I pushed the fix out, as well as new src tar balls and binaries. Sorry about that.
|
|
3 other source of fonts with SVG tables, from the opentype mailing list: https://github.com/RoelN/Compyx |
|
More examples of SVG tables posted by Sairus Patel of Adobe to opentype mailing list: Gecko Emoji http://people.mozilla.org/%7Ejkew/opentype-svg/GeckoEmoji.html (Mozilla) |
|
Note to myself (and others): |
|
Retire the warnings: The |
|
@twardoch : That issue with kern/hdmx/VDMX has already been raised before ( HinTak#2 ) . It needs to be a Microsoft decision, as the Font Validator serves not only as compliance to the OT spec, but also their shipping preference. So between 'Error' and 'Okay', it was their past decision where and in what direction 'optional' choices went. I regard it as a past decision of theirs and it needs to be changed, if desired, by them. It is not part of an update to current spec. The wording of description of those tables have not changed across the 3 versions of the spec, I don't think? |
This is place holder to track all the 2015 spec related updates. Specific detailed discussions about individual items, please fie additional issues and put a URL back here.
New tables that need checking - e.g. COLR/CPAL/MATH/SVG . We also need font samples with these features for testing.
New versions of tables - e.g. OS/2 v5 (was v3 in 2009), checking additional fields (two new ones), and expanded or modified usage of existing fields, such as the usage of the code page bits being changed from reserved to used by lesser-used languages. There are likely other tables having an overhaul, like the kern table between 2003 and 2009, which require new tests to be written and added.
CBLC/CBDT falls uncomfortably between these - it is a variation/enhancement of existing tables, so the current code put these through the existing tables' code path. But there are additional work to be done , to check old table name with new features and new table names with old version, as well as checking all the new features added in CBLC/CBDT.
There is smaller scale change like expansion of the feature list ( http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otspec/featurelist.htm) . Mostly it is expansion, but additional warnings need to be done on withdrawn tags also.
Lastly I should mention that CFF support is poor, though a pre-2009 table.
Thanks Sami Artur Mandelbaum on (http://typedrawers.com/discussion/1222/microsoft-font-validator-lives/p2) for suggesting https://github.com/khaledhosny/xits-math for future MATH table testing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: