On 2011-06-25, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >> >>> Le 2011-06-24 13:13, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit : >>> >>>> So, let me state and restate this : ODF will not embed fonts in the >>>> 1.2, 1.3, nor in the future, because the format is not meant to focus on >>>> faithful layout rendering. Instead, PDF is meant that. ODF focuses on >>>> office document exchanges. >>>> >>> >>> 4. It is incorrect to presume that Font Embedding will not be in ODF 1.3 >>> or any other. While font embedding did not make the feature cut in the >>> prioritization for ODF 1.2, that does not mean it can't be resurrected. >>> It is early days for ODF 1.3, which is scheduled to take a two-year >>> development process. >>> What is *missing* is a serious proposal that deals with the >>> complexities, borrows from some already-worked-out approach in other >>> software, and is brought forth at the ODF TC in an unencumbered form. >>> Someone has to do the heavy lifting. [...] > I think this conversation needs to be made more concrete. > > The inclusion of font embedding into the ODF 1.x specification is not > the issue. > > The issue is, who has it be such an imperative that they are willing > to have and document an implementation-specific solution well enough > that others can interoperate with it. Then, or concurrently, it can > be rolled into the ODF specification work as the basis for an > independently-implementable, interoperable feature of ODF.
The problem is that the research I've been doing about this subject has been leading me to the position that LibO/OOo is not going to implement it because it must be implemented in ODF, and because ODF won't support that. So, after reading your messages, there are two issues: 1. There's a misunderstanding of the position held by the ODF TC (or maybe it was some decision taken long ago of which you don't know?), and 2. this sounds like a chicken and egg problem, LibO/OOo will only implement embedding if it gets in ODF, and it will only get in ODF if there's a working implementation. I've always held the opinion the chicken must have come first, because "egg" is shorthand for "[chicken] egg". But I doubt this helps here. > The ODF TC does not implement anything. And it is a waste of the > volunteer efforts of the ODF TC participants to specify features that > no one implements or that are not practically implementable or for > which there are already good-enough solutions that can be adapted. > There's a hand-and-glove partnership required for a feature as > substantial as font embedding. Makes sense. [...] > It is definitely the case that the ODF specification does > not specify the rendering and presentation of documents. But that > doesn't exclude font embedding. After all, there are already > significant provisions for fonts in ODF, they just don't encompass > embedding font files. I see font embedding as a way to make interoperation easier, and not to achieve faithful representation. I think a major goal is to have ODF being used on several platforms, and available fonts differ from platform to platform. OTOH I guess LibO can (and probably already does?) bundle some fonts with it, so that the default fonts are available on every install of LibO (but this still excludes other ODF-compatible applications). -- Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg) gopher://sdf-eu.org/1/users/njsg -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
