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

Re: SOR: CORS or From-Origin?

From: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@google.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:51:21 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTimEg8GD9Zp=0bOGR6emgYfjPLBSMHj05NktQDa7@mail.gmail.com>
To: liam@w3.org
Cc: public-webfonts-wg@w3.org
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 16:16 -0500, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > Given the discussion going on, I wonder, has it been considered to
> include a
> > SOR flag in the WOFF file itself?
>
> By the time you've got the font in order to check the flag, it's too
> late for the server to refuse to send it, no?
>

No.  This is exactly like the current proposed SOR, which is also
client-side.  This is not about the server refusing to serve.  You can
always download the font using "wget", and the current SOR mechanism would
help there either.  It's about the font not working on other people's
website.


> The domain locking feature in EOT sparked a lot of "DRM" opposition, and
> is a large part of what led to Woff in the first place.
>

I understand.  The major opposition to EOT's domain locking mechanism was
that the EOT files needed to be regenerated to move to a new domain.  What
I'm proposing on the other hand is exactly equivalent to the current SOR,
except that relaxing the requirement does not need server reconfiguration.

behdad


> Liam
>
>
> --
> Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
> Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
> Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org http://barefootliam.org/
>
>
Received on Thursday, 10 February 2011 21:52:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 10 February 2011 21:52:13 GMT