W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > January to March 1996

RE: Is this mail list active?

From: Bill Hill <billhill@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 96 11:33:10 PST
To: www-font@w3.org
Message-Id: red-36-msg960125192821MTP[01.52.00]000000bd-2550
I agree with Hakon. Scalable fonts are the sensible option. At the risk 
of starting a religious flame war, TrueType is the best format on 
screen because it can be hinted for low resolution. So you get the 
benefits of bit-map and scalable together. The font files are big, but 
there are ways around that.
----------
From: Hakon Lie  <Hakon.Lie@sophia.inria.fr>
To: Paul Haeberli  <paul@balla.asd.sgi.com>
Cc:  <www-font@w3.org>
Subject: Is this mail list active?
Date: Thursday, January 25, 1996 10:14AM

Paul Haeberli writes:

> Is this mail list active?

It's starting up. I count 12 subscribers at this point..

While I have Paul's attention: your WebFonts proposal [1] is
interesting. I have one suggestion and one concern.

- wouldn't PNG be a better format to base WebFonts on? First, it's
  politically more correct. Second, you can hide the metainformation
  inside the PNG-file.

- providing bitmap fonts is device-dependent. The selected font may
  have just the right size on the author's screen, but will not scale
  to the reader's preferred size or any printer. If we aim for
  consistent presentations, isn't scalable fonts the only option?

[1] http://reality.sgi.com/grafica/webfonts/

Regards,

-h&kon

Hakon W Lie, W3C/INRIA, Sophia-Antipolis, France
http://www.w3.org/People/howcome  howcome@w3.org







[1] http://reality.sgi.com/grafica/webfonts/

Regards,

-h&kon

Hakon W Lie, W3C/INRIA, Sophia-Antipolis, France
http://www.w3.org/People/howcome  howcome@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 25 January 1996 14:30:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:37 UTC