W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webfonts-wg@w3.org > February 2011

RE: apple and same-origin restrictions

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 16:05:43 +0000
To: David Berlow <dberlow@fontbureau.com>, "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <045A765940533D4CA4933A4A7E32597E2AB09438@TK5EX14MBXC120.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
I’m not sure ‘adding to the benefits list’ is the issue here. Getting the current set of benefits understood
seems to remain the primary challenge.

From: public-webfonts-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-webfonts-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Berlow
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 7:29 AM
To: public-webfonts-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: apple and same-origin restrictions

Mr. Slye@Adobe > This remark from Apple in that thread -- [quoted below] -- reveals a breathtakingly simplistic view of WOFF.

Mr: Stachowiak@Apple > In fact, in some ways it would be better if WOFF itself would go away, since it has no real benefit over other font formats.

Well what’s the breath-giving view that will breath life into a real benefits list of WOFF? Or... you’ll be hearing a lot more of this, as momentum cannot be the only benefit.

Mr. Galineau@microsoft.com<mailto:Galineau@microsoft.com> > (Left as an exercise to the reader: what the reaction would be
if the author of this gem had a microsoft.com<http://microsoft.com> email address).

If anyone at Microsoft needs encouragement to add to the benefits list of WOFF, I’d be glad to see that.
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2011 16:06:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 1 February 2011 16:06:22 GMT