- From: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
- Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 22:09:17 -0400
- To: Sergey Malkin <sergeym@microsoft.com>, Christopher Slye <cslye@adobe.com>, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- CC: "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
On Friday, October 01, 2010 5:21 PM Sergey Malkin wrote: > > Håkon wrote: > > > I.e., I think it's ok for browsers to cache decoded files, but they > shouldn't be exposed in other ways. > > This bothers me a bit. I understand that goal is performance. But this > is one of things people did not like about raw fonts lying around on > user's disks. With unpacked fonts cached, users will be able to grab > naked OpenType font binary, stripped form WOFF metadata or private > data. Some encryption/obfuscation may be welcome. > I think that it is perfectly fine to cache the downloaded WOFF files just like any other resource used by a web page, but I just don't see a need to cache the unpacked raw fonts. The impact on performance would be negligible, and I don't think any UA would attempt to cache e.g. uncompressed bitmap images instead of the original JPEG files. Cached WOFF file can be used offline (again, just like any other resource), and they will carry the metadata that users can see if they wish. Regards, Vlad > Thanks, > Sergey
Received on Sunday, 3 October 2010 02:10:36 UTC