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

RE: WOFF without same origin restriction in Opera?

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 02:37:40 +0000
To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, Sergey Malkin <sergeym@microsoft.com>
CC: "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, "info@ascenderfonts.com" <info@ascenderfonts.com>, "Jonas Sicking" <sicking@mozilla.com>
Message-ID: <045A765940533D4CA4933A4A7E32597E2AB03084@TK5EX14MBXC120.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

> [John Daggett:]
> > Sylvain Galineau wrote:
> >
> > > And I also believe other issues are far more important than this one.
> > > Today, we run into fonts that IE9 rejects in accordance with the
> > > spec but load fine in Firefox.
> >
> > These are fonts that should be rejected because of same origin
> > restrictions? If so, that's a bug and should be fixed.  Do you have
> > examples of this?  We should make sure the test suite contains any
> > examples that appear to be handled inconsistently across implementations.
> No, they are fonts that should be rejected based on WOFF conformance
> criteria i.e. invalid data in a table. Sergey can give you exact examples;
> the last one was served by Typekit.
> The obvious scenario here being browsers being at different levels of
> conformance and thus the same font loading/failing depending on the
> browser. And if implementing these criteria screws up pages that work
> today, we browser makers may find ourselves facing a strong disincentive
> to implement certain checks depending on their impact. (Or maybe face a
> strong incentive to undo one).

Actually, I may be wrong here and am checking with Sergey. There has been
some cases where a font loaded in Firefox but not in IE but it may not
be related to WOFF conformance at all. 

Still, the risk of having different browsers implementing different 
overlapping set of conformance checks is non-zero. Given how popular
fonts are becoming on the web, it may cause some confusion. I don't
have a proposal or particular insights on what should be done but would
love to hear from others.

(I'll follow up with John and Sergey separately on the specific issue I
was originally referring to).
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 02:38:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:34:15 UTC