Re: Fonts WG Charter feedback

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Levantovsky,
Vladimir<Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com> wrote:
> I share both of your views on this. I think that compression is going to
> be the most valuable component of the new web font format, providing
> benefits for both authors and users.

I think the most valuable component will be the fact that it's
actually supported by everyone.  Font-specific compression is a
reasonable idea -- we don't require generic compression for images or
videos, now, do we? -- but IMO it would be best to get
interoperability first, and think about further enhancements later.
There's no sense in sidetracking the discussion with compression
before we have *complete* agreement on the much more divisive aspects
of the wrapper format (what sort of anti-piracy measures? bare font
linking also supported?).  gzip isn't optimal, but it's good enough
for a start.

Received on Thursday, 2 July 2009 02:20:31 UTC