- From: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 12:05:13 -0400
- To: "Mikko Rantalainen" <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>, <www-font@w3.org>
On Thursday, July 02, 2009 10:07 AM Mikko Rantalainen wrote: > > If compression is considered important, then the server administrator > can just enable HTTP Content Encoding with gzip and/or deflate. If > deflate and gzip methods (that are commonly implemented by user agents) > are not good enough for fonts, then I suggest asking user agent and > server software vendors to implement additional methods. Nothing > prevents implementing e.g. lzma or bzip2 methods for transfer encoding. > As such methods have high compression ratios, have publicly available > implementations and are suitable for other files but fonts, restricting > such new compression method to be used with just fonts would be insane. > Who said anything about restricting new compression methods to fonts? However, I do believe that using the intelligent font compression would bring better results (in term of compression efficiency), and modifying MTX e.g. to use LZMA compression with the existing pre-processor that optimizes font data to remove redundancy could be a killer combination. It is feasible that W3C Fonts WG would develop a new technology standard that could be used in many other areas as well, where font embedding is needed. Regards, Vladimir > -- > Mikko >
Received on Thursday, 2 July 2009 16:05:51 UTC