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

Re: Fonts WG Charter feedback

From: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 17:35:26 -0700
Message-ID: <4A4FF54E.70603@tiro.com>
To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
CC: Tal Leming <tal@typesupply.com>, Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org> 
Håkon wrote:

> Personally, I think that license terms is a better enforcer than
> technical means, but I'm also open for a technical solution:

License terms need to be policeable, in ways that don't mean that we 
spend all our time chasing pirates instead of making new fonts. So I 
like the idea of single-origin linking as described here:

>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Nov/0412.html

Compression should benefit everyone, so seems a no-brainer.

I'm afraid I can't claim to have read all of the >200 emails of the last 
few days. I am wondering if you, or someone else, can summarise what 
*technical* objections Microsoft might have to a scheme such as you 
describe, other than that they already support EOT in their browser.

JH
Received on Sunday, 5 July 2009 20:43:12 GMT

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