[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier
From: |
David Bevan |
Subject: |
RE: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:55:17 -0500 |
> In general scope, I think, you raised a concern that
> the checksum in TTF header is too simple (it's a sum
> of 32-bit values of the table) to guarantee the identity.
> It's reasonable.
My concern is that the (small) tables may actually be the same in a variety of
fonts.
> If I check the fonts bundled to Microsoft Windows,
> Mac OS (Classic & OS X), and distributed in GNU/Linux
> distribution and I find no conflict, is it sufficient
> guarantee?
That seems reasonable.
> If not, I cannot access wider coverage
> of the fonts, so, the possible solution would be...
>
> 1) identify by family name comparison is used too,
> and add a fallback by sfnt table checksum.
>
> 2) in addition to the tag-name of the table and
> the checksum, the length should be checked.
>
> 3) if it's still insufficient... should we use
> our own hash value instead of the checksum
> in sfnt header.
Only 1) would address my concern.
David %^>
- [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, mpsuzuki, 2010/11/16
- Re: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, Werner LEMBERG, 2010/11/17
- RE: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, David Bevan, 2010/11/17
- Re: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, mpsuzuki, 2010/11/17
- RE: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier,
David Bevan <=
- Re: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, mpsuzuki, 2010/11/17
- Re: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, mpsuzuki, 2010/11/21
- Re: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, mpsuzuki, 2010/11/22
- Re: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, Werner LEMBERG, 2010/11/22
- Re: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, suzuki toshiya, 2010/11/22
- Re: [ft-devel] [FYI] MingLiU identifier, Werner LEMBERG, 2010/11/22