Document good and bad case studies in spec change proposals #12
Comments
|
A really bad case is the |
|
OK, how was the MERG table proposed for inclusion in MOFF, and how was it
accepted?
|
It wasn't. MS just released it in MOT one day and it appeared in MOFF. |
Okay, I expect we can figure out when the first public date for this was. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/opentype/spec/merg is dated Aug 7th 2018.
It seems this is true: https://www.google.com/search?q=merg+https%3A%2F%2Flists.aau.at%2Fpipermail%2Fmpeg-otspec%2F turns up just 1 result, https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2018-September/000049.html - and the attached file isn't available for download. (@vlevantovsky is that correct, that all files attached to emails sent to the list are not archived?) So, it seems there was no proposal - which is odd, since there was a 'proposal' from MS for COLR (https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2013-July/000303.html) - although I say proposal in quotes since that was made after the format was announced (at the MS Build event.) ...Is what you say you want to do in https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2020-September/002388.html a 'best case'? ;p |
|
The proposal was made and presented to this AHG for review and discussion back in 2016, as part of the group of proposals from MS, Apple and Adobe. See https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2016-October/000827.html |
|
As far as the attachments are concerned, Yahoo Groups that we used in the past offered file storage facilities that included both documents uploaded by group members and the attachments to emails (attached documents would be stored there with the download link being part of the email). When Yahoo decided to discontinue support for all user-generated content, they removed group files and kept only email archives. |
|
FWIW, I added generic acceptance of MERG as an opentype table to FontVal in Nov 2018 (just to stop FontVal warning it is unknown). So it "landed" quite a bit before then. There were multiple /regular drafts from @vlevantovsky . I try to keep up, but my willingness to spend time on FontVal is limited by resources. I suspect others feel the same way about reading draft documents ahead of GA. It is easy to criticize something as a dubious idea (I am not for or against MERG - just speaking in general terms) with a few years of hindsight. |
|
I'd like to add that there have been significant efforts put in place by AHG members to review and contribute to the first working draft, see https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2017-January/subject.html |
|
Thanks for the leads, vlad! However, since the attachments were deleted, and no longer accessible to newer members of the AHG like myself, would it be possible to make them available somewhere again? It's hard to piece together the timeline. I also think it's relevant when the MSOT spec was updated, and moreover when the DWrite ship sailed. |
Not hard at all! Every email in the archive linked in my previous comments has a date/time stamp! |
|
Okay, I'll join sc29. Are MPEG document registry and ISO Livelink publicly available archives? Obviously date stamps are there, but the contents in attachments isn't available as expected, and the fact I have to go anywhere else is what makes it hard.. |
|
Access to document archives is password protected, and available to active members only. |
Correct names of archives, add note on access conditions as stated in MPEGGroup#12 (comment)
Members of SC29 are not individuals nor companies. They are national standards bodies. What individuals can do is to join a national standards body and participate in the national committee that corresponds to SC29 (if there is one in that country's standards body). |
A minor clarification - it depends on national committee rules. In US, membership in INCITS is open to corporate entities only, an individual cannot join unless he/she incorporates as LLC or something similar. For corporate entities who are already members of INCITS L3 committee (a mirror of SC29 in US) - a primary member can nominate any number of associate members (i.e., company employees) to participate as experts. |
|
Thanks for the corrections!
Sadly it seems this is far from universal. |
|
I do NOT feel safe to express my opinions in this forum. |
|
I studied the SC29 repository. Sadly, WG11 documents do not exist there. |
|
@PeterConstable please could you take a look at the private repo commit history for the markdown file behind https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/opentype/spec/merg and clarify the timeline for that piece? I also wonder if you can determine when DWrite shipped support for it. |
|
@vlevantovsky please could you provide more details about how to retrieve the documents you referenced above? :)
|
2017-02-21 w16626.zip I believe draft ballot comments shared on the AHG list would no longer be available (it was a draft after all) but the "official" submitted copies, as well as all output documents produced by MPEG since 1995 are still available from MPEG Document Management System (password protected). |
I have the first 2 of the 3 in my hard drive. I had a habit of downloading and hoping to find time to read them, but rarely got round to... |
|
The overlap bit issue is a great case study, touching on TrueType, OpenType and WOFF2 format specs. Thread starts here |
Correction. WG11 documents are in the directory "Archive folder (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 11)" which is in turn in the directory "02. General committee documents". |
@murata2makoto Your investigative activities in this repo and communications on the AHG mail list are not covered by any of the AHG mandates, and your attempts to cast a shadow of doubt on the legitimacy of our work appear to be self-serving and disrespectful. This behavior is highly unprofessional, especially considering that you hold a position as SC34 officer! |
In the past, I must assume, a change has been proposed to the MOFF Spec that went very well - good idea, clear business case, submission text flew by without much discussion other than approval - all round exemplary.
And I must assume there is also "the worst case so far", and while it may (or, may not) be uncomfortable for some, in order to learn from the past, and not repeat past mistakes, it will be equally valuable to document this case study too.
I'd therefore like to suggest that the readme have links to some "trail heads" on the mpeg-otspec list archives where anyone interested can see these cases first hand.
Ultimately I'd like to work on a proper "missing manual" for MOFF AHG members, but these 2 case studies (and any interesting ones in between) will be the raw material for such a document, and everything is in the mail archive already, we just need the list of Subject lines.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: