Re: .webfont Proposal

On Jul 8, 2009, at 5:43 PM, John Daggett wrote:

> 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.

Do you have any comments on the proposal beyond the <allow> element?

Tal