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

Re: Questions re web-fonts

From: Gustavo Ferreira <gustavo.ferreira@hipertipo.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:47:56 +0200
Cc: Erik van Blokland <erik@letterror.com>
Message-Id: <15C1A048-6E1E-41B7-8A49-A14CE0831F5F@hipertipo.net>
To: www-font@w3.org
On Jul 15, 2009, at 6:07 PM, Erik van Blokland wrote:

> On Jul 15, 2009, at 5:49 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>
>> Any new format, on the other
>> hand, even if decided on today, will require at least half a decade
>> before it's truly usable.
>
> This is just not true.
>
> EOT lite *is* a new format for Opera, Safari, FireFox. Support has  
> to start from scratch. So, 2014 before those apps support it you  
> reckon?
>
> A webfont wrapper as proposed (more on that in a seperate post) is  
> not a new format. It is a plain ttf / otf which can be offloaded to  
> the OS for rendering. The unwrapper code is a handful of lines in  
> Python, I'm sure it can be done in a single line of Perl. Supporting  
> EOT and it's light version require a much bigger investment in time  
> and testing. Regardless of what gets decided, there is no reason to  
> resort to imaginary arguments to dismiss things.

The arguments for a wrapper with meta-information make sense to me.

I'm curious about how this webfont wrapper proposal can be connected  
to existing efforts from CreativeCommons in creating a general legal &  
machine-readable digital rights expression infra-structure  something  
that Tom Lord's original media wrapper proposal tried to address.

Related links:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking_Works_Technical
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/RDFa
http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/15768
Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2009 16:48:32 GMT

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