https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823984
--- Comment #14 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mail...@laposte.net> --- The OpenType spec is quite hard to read because its authors do not use IETF-style unambiguous MUST SHOULD etc but plain human text (sometimes, repeating the same point multiple times with various levels of emphasis). It badly needs refactoring by a professional standards writer, to remove the repetitions, and make requirements more explicit and forceful. Generally speaking, you should apply everything the spec recommends no matter how polite and un-assertive the wording is. Because anything authors think is a good idea *is* a good idea, and would not have been documented if it were not a hard requirement for software somewhere. Besides, anything stated in part of the spec is likely to be repeated or built upon in more forceful terms in other parts, in later revisions, or derived standards¹. ¹ CCS4 was written by people more familiar with standards; it generally repeats OpenType, with a lot of MUSTs sprinkled everywhere, because there’s only one way to make things work reliably, and the original vocabulary is dangerously watered down -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ fonts-bugs mailing list -- fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to fonts-bugs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org
