- From: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 23:56:14 +0000
- To: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
Thomas Lord [mailto:lord@emf.net] wrote:
>> 1. Purposely breaking interop with desktop OSes (EOT, any obfuscation
>> proposal, most compression proposals).
>
>That is reason enough for W3C TAG to object to any
>such proposal, in my opinion.
Not sure why that would be the case. If it enables more fonts to be licensed for web use, then why would they object?
>This in spite of that fact that such a restriction [SO]
>is completely inappropriate for libre fonts.
And therefore, if the font permits, it should be possible to ignore ("not describe") such a restriction.
-C
Received on Thursday, 2 July 2009 23:57:02 UTC