[Openfontlibrary] Font File Type and Admins?

[Jon Phillips]

On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 19:39 -0700, George Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 15:22, Jon Phillips wrote:
> > Ok, one of the big things about Open Clip Art Library that makes things
> > simple is that the project uses a public standard, SVG. What would the
> > equivalent be for font?
> Well, of course SVG does have a font format too. And that format can
> store either quadratic or cubic splines. But it doesn't store PS hints
> and it doesn't store TT instructions. Nor does it contain all the info
> present in GPOS/GSUB/morx etc. No support for bitmaps. No support for
> multi-master.
> 
> > Do you all think we should similarly store in the best and most open
> > font file format?
> > 
> > Seems like OpenType might be this standard. Is this true?
> Even if by OpenType you mean either ttf or otf files then you won't
> cover 
>   * Apple Advanced Typography
>   * type3 (and the equivalent to type3 in svg), 
>   * multi-master (and Apple's equivalent to multi-master for truetype) 
>   * bitmaps.
>   * Various groups have added various tables to the basic 'sfnt' format
> 	which I think, technically, means they don't conform to the otf
> 	standard.
> 
> But you do want to retain the distinction between cubic and quadratic
> (truetype vs postscript) and not lump everything into one or the other.
> So you can't restrict yourself to just otf or just ttf.
> 
> (Apple Advanced Typography will probably just slide in unless you try
> really hard to prevent it -- it looks like a normal ttf file unless you
> check the tables).
> 
> Is type3 a format worth considering?
> 
> Is bitmap only a format worth considering?
>   * OpenType does not include a bitmap only format
>   * Windows does not support a bitmap only sfnt
>   * Apple has a bitmap only sfnt format but it's a bit unexpected
>   * X11 has a bitmap only sfnt which is a bit more reasonable
> 	(extension .otb)
> 
> Is Multi-Master important?
>   This got removed from the type2 spec at MS insistance and can't be
>     specified in an OpenType font.
>   If Multi-Master matters then you must add support for pfa/pfb
>   (Apple has it's own Multi-Master like concept which slots into
>    a ttf file so again it will probably just work).
> 
> > I'm not really in favor of allowing any ole filetype and this is a way
> > we can innovate and push for support of a good standard.
> > 
> > What do you all think?
> So I think the big hold ups would be support for Multi-Master and type3
> fonts.
> 
> Type3 fonts don't even have a standard extension.

I really really really appreciate your wisdom on this.

I want to make sure we keep it simple, keep as much data as possible,
and keep to using public standards.

I'm thinking this for submissions: 1.) need to have an open type
submission 2.) upload as well the master files used to make the font 3.)
OPTIONAL, include as many other versions of the font as possible

I think since the font file formats are basically screwy, we have to set
our minimum requirements which is the best open public standard that is
widely used, Open Type, and then try and get as much of the other data
as possible so we can mutate it, change things, etc...

What do you think about this? Also, what does everyone else think?

Is this type of guideline good for the project and clear for users?
Obviously, the site's UI will really need to reflect this...

George, and great wiki users on this project, please help us take this
great information and collect it so we won't have to re-hash this high
quality knowledge again and again: http://openfontlibrary.org/wiki

Jon

> 
-- 
Jon Phillips

San Francisco, CA
USA PH 510.499.0894
jon at rejon.org
http://www.rejon.org

MSN, AIM, Yahoo Chat: kidproto
Jabber Chat: rejon at gristle.org
IRC: rejon at irc.freenode.net