Subject: [Justfont] Fragment syntax for collections

From: "Chris Lilley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 16:04:07 -0500

There is an open issue on the Fragment syntax for collections.
https://github.com/svgeesus/ietf-justfont/issues/18

On reflection, the numeric fragment syntax has no obvious benefit. It isn't deployed, and is fragile. Allowing both the numeric version and the string:based (PostScript ID) version requires carfeful disambiguation rules to allow for a font that has a numeric font name.

Removing the numeric fragment and just allowing the PostScript ID seems better. That ID is already used in CSS 3 Fonts when referencing local fonts, for example

src: local(Foo-Bold)

so therefore, if a woff2 holds a collection, it is simple and straightforward to say

src: url(https://example.org/Bar.woff2#Foo-Bold)
rather than
src: url(https://example.org/Bar.woff2#3)

Unless someone speaks out in favor of the numeric fragment syntax, i plan to remove it and add the PostScript name in its place.

--
Chris Lilley
@svgeesus
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media