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: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 10:28:08 -0700
Message-ID: <4A523428.3070603@tiro.com>
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
CC: Christopher Fynn <cfynn@gmx.net>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>, Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
Sylvain Galineau wrote:

> Indeed and embedding bits, like rootstrings, are intended to be enforced.
> And their enforcement cannot be optional lest it causes interop issues.
> (Some of which already exist today wrt same-origin checks)

Embedding bits are already part of the OT spec. A browser that supports 
raw TTF/OTF is already either respecting or not-respecting those bits. 
What isn't clear, though, is exactly how those bits relate to web 
linking, i.e. what constitutes the web equivalent of e.g. 'Print & 
Preview Only' or 'Editable Embedding', and who gets to decide how they 

Received on Monday, 6 July 2009 17:28:50 UTC

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