W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > April to June 2009

RE: Fonts WG Charter feedback

From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 03:23:27 +0200
Message-ID: <19017.26895.515190.77447@opera.com>
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: (wrong string) åkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
Also sprach Sylvain Galineau:

 > I would think that shipping implementations that do not
 > interoperate with 3/4 of the browsers out there is disruptive as
 > well

If Microsoft wanted other browsers to interoperate, why did you keep
your format secret for a decade? Why didn't you consult with others
along the way? Why did you add root strings to the format -- you must
have understood that this would be contentious?

Asking for a WG at this stage, after other browsers have chosen to
support another open, standardized, and universally supported format,
is too disruptive for the emerging, interoperable webfont
implemetations. Also, it's too late. Or, too early.

EOT had 9 years of between shipping and until someone challenged it.

I'm asking for 5 years; if webfonts (as in linking to TT/OT) are not
successfull 5 years from now, I'm happy to see a new WG chartered.

 > By releasing an alternative to the only existing format that was
 > widely deployed, browser vendors have already fragmented the
 > market, Hakon.

There was no market to fragment; EOT has seen little or no use outside
of India (where a handful of web sites continue to use it).

-h&kon
              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 01:24:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 11 June 2011 00:14:01 GMT