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

Re: Fonts WG Charter feedback

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:45:47 -0700 (PDT)
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Message-ID: <26530492.442801246329947503.JavaMail.root@cm-mail01.mozilla.org>
>> Implicit in both this and their old proposal is the assumption that
>> this is the *only* web font format, that TTF/OTF fonts are not
>> linkable resources.  So web authors using either free fonts or fonts
>> with a license that permits direct linking would be forced through
>> extra hoops for no tangible benefit whatsoever.
>> 
>> Obfuscated/compression schemes are fine but not if it implies that we
>> make things harder rather than easier for some users.
> 
> Aren't today's authors 'forced through extra hoops' even if the font
> is licensed for direct linking as soon as they want to ensure the same
> experience for all their users ?

You mean to support IE usage?  Sure, but there's not much I can do about
that expect hope that Microsoft commits the resources to improve
typography on the web and not just in platform-specific products like
WPF and Silverlight.  EOT may have been supported since the days of Rome
in IE but it still lacks support for basic font descriptors
(font-weight, font-style) and the ability to use Postscript CFF fonts. 
To say nothing of the problems with loading Postscript CFF fonts for use
with Uniscribe, *sigh*.  These aren't hoops but brick walls.
Received on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 02:47:26 GMT

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