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

Re: .webfont Proposal

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:49:50 -0500
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0907081449p4c8f37bax37def64beef9db92@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Cc: Tal Leming <tal@typesupply.com>, Erik van Blokland <erik@letterror.com>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 4:43 PM, John Daggett<jdaggett@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> - The <allow> element would list domains that are licensed to use the
>> font. A meta URL, "any", would signify that the font could be used on
>> all domains.
>
> This is a root string proposal in another form and suffers all the same
> problems, a complete pain to manage, need URL's for every staging and
> cached version, including every possible local version (i.e. the
> complete set of possible file://<drive>/<path> permutations possible for
> those working as site devs).  All web-caching solutions (e.g. Akamai)
> would need to generate new versions of fonts per server, since the base URL
> is going to be different.  Change your site around?  Regenerate all your
> fonts.  Generally sucky.

Note, though, that the proposal says that mismatches still allow the
font to be used, but suggest that UAs may offer an unobtrusive alert
about the mismatch.

> Same-site origin restrictions are simple, font linking is allowed only
> when the origin is the same.  CORS is only involved for *exceptions*,
> such as a font library wanting to provide general access to everyone, so
> 99% of the time authors don't need to worry about CORS at all.

Agreed.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 8 July 2009 21:50:45 GMT

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