W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webfonts-wg@w3.org > April 2010

Re: About using CORS

From: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 17:56:27 -0700
Message-ID: <4BD787BB.20703@tiro.com>
To: public-webfonts-wg@w3.org
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Christopher Slye wrote:

> Well, you could say that the difference between WOFF fonts and other assets (images, etc.) is that WOFF is not standardized yet. Perhaps if we could go back and do it all over again, we would require same origin restriction* (with CORS) for images and other assets too.

It is also worth pointing out, perhaps, that a font isn't analogous to 
an image or a video: its a piece of software, a little machine that 
typesets text. Whereas the value of an image, video or even a script is 
generally linked directly to the content of the image or video or to the 
immediate function of the script, the value of a font is essentially 
limited only by the amount of text in the world that it might be used to 
typeset, which is to say practically unlimited.

A web served font is in some ways more analogous to a web served 
application -- not least in including executable code and being a 
possible medium for virus infection or trojan attack --, and 
specifically to applications that enable creation of new content. Fonts 
are tools for making text.

I've seen fonts -- particularly in the context of the web -- compared to 
all sorts of other things over the years (downloadable music files has 
been a popular one: conflating a content creation tool with a content 
consumption medium). I've come to the conclusion that fonts are pretty 
unique, and there is no direct analogy to be made to other tools, media, 
etc.

John Hudson
Received on Wednesday, 28 April 2010 00:57:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 28 April 2010 00:57:05 GMT