W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > July to September 2009

RE: Fonts WG Charter feedback

From: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 00:17:50 +0000
To: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
CC: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, 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>
Message-ID: <61027177C88032458A7862054B3C6258059BF0@TK5EX14MBXW652.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
I'm sorry, I don't think I ever dismissed your wrapper proposal out of hand.  I would consider some version of it still on the table; I didn't see any response from any of the other respondants?

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Lord [mailto:lord@emf.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 5:12 PM
To: Chris Wilson
Cc: Thomas Phinney; Tab Atkins Jr.; Aryeh Gregor; Håkon Wium Lie; Sylvain Galineau; www-font@w3.org
Subject: RE: Fonts WG Charter feedback

On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 23:53 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Thomas Lord [mailto:lord@emf.net] wrote:
> >I said that web interop using
> >TTF/OTF would create a market for entrants who
> >use more permissive licenses.
> How about we create a market that encourages entrants, whether they want their TTFs copied or not?

With the combination of requiring TTF/OTF and requiring
some novel format.

Now, there are additional constraints.  If the process
is to be legitimate, in my view, the novel format must
contribute some significant value to web standards
above and beyond mere novelty.  Hence, my general,
simple, extensible wrapper proposal which I would have
thought, before the latest round of "tensions", you
folks at MSFT might have embraced saying "Now, there's
a clever idea we can get behind!"

Received on Friday, 3 July 2009 00:18:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:40 UTC