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

RE: .webfont Proposal 2

From: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:55:06 -0700
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1247799306.6302.160.camel@dell-desktop.example.com>
All I can say, Sylvain, is that I have existence
proof that there exist others who have vastly less
difficulty than you profess to have following my
arguments and not mistaking them for bald assertions.

I'm not interested in getting (any further) into
what we called, in the vernacular of some societies
I've passed among, a "piss fight" - but I've no
confidence you share that sentiment based on your
writings.

-t


On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 02:50 +0000, Sylvain Galineau wrote:
> >From: Thomas Lord [mailto:lord@emf.net]
> 
> 
> >Which is why other arguments are added.
> 
> Assertions are not arguments.
> 
> >You are simply mistaken.
> 
> Well, I'm sure that settles it, then.
> 
> >It is not an untruthful fact, certainly.
> 
> Your saying so proves it. Assertions, apparently, are all that's needed.
> 
> >W3C and other important collections of standards generally
> >use the mime media types to name media file formats.
> 
> MIME media types do not in any way suggest or justify MIME encoding when
> other common solutions work perfectly well. It never did in practice. But
> if you're going to bring up the W3C, let us see the list of commonly implemented
> standards that recommend using MIME for the purpose of packaging binary files
> with metadata manifests. Let us compare it to the list of real-world applications
> who compress the data as filed in a zipped archive for the same purpose.
> 
> >The burden is on you to show why this case should be
> >different.
> 
> Sorry, it isn't. Since I am not the one asking the proposal's authors to make a change,
> there is no burden on me to demonstrate anything. Please, do name widely deployed
> applications and standards that use MIME encoding for the purpose of binding
> binary resources with metadata. Can you at least make one concrete effort to back up your
> case with evidence ? Please ?
> 
> 
> >I have nothing further to say to you in a civil tone
> >at this juncture.
> 
> No worries. Given the record, your ability to keep a civil tone
> in the presence of contrary or challenging feedback was not assumed to exist.
> 
> >I have difficulty accepting that you are making these
> >arguments of yours in a spirit of intellectual honesty.
> 
> Yes, I did use argument instead of assertions. All I get in return is condescending dismissal, more assertions
> and yet another personal attack. It is sad you would think this establishes anything about anyone but yourself.
> 
> As someone who implemented a MIME client, I am honestly curious as to how and why MIME could add anything here.
> It is clear, however, that I will not get useful or relevant answers. Which is fine, as I agree with the proposed solution.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
Received on Friday, 17 July 2009 02:55:46 GMT

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