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 00:20:44 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, HÃ¥kon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
Message-ID: <61027177C88032458A7862054B3C6258059C06@TK5EX14MBXW652.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Chris Wilson<Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> 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 argument is disingenuous.  If Mozilla were to come up with a new
>font format that was 100% supported by every font foundry, but it was
>solely licensed under the GPL (effectively preventing MS from using it
>in IE), that would still be unacceptable.
>
>The most important metric here is number of users reached, not number
>of fonts allowed. (At least, IMO.)  Fonts allowed is still an
>important metric, mind you, but not the *most* important metric.  Any
>solution must be have interop with all browsers.

Okay, I'm sorry, I should have said "if it helps maximize Users*BrowserSupport*FontsAvailable, why would they object?"

-Chris
Received on Friday, 3 July 2009 00:21:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 11 June 2011 00:14:02 GMT