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

Re: A way forward

From: karsten luecke <list@kltf.de>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 10:44:03 +0200 (MEST)
Message-Id: <200907240844.n6O8i3uX005833@post.webmailer.de>
To: www-font@w3.org
John Daggett wrote:
> Right now linking to TTF/OTF fonts represents what will soon be an
> interoperable solution for all browsers other than Internet Explorer.
> Some authors may consider this to be enough, using @font-face only
> as a progressive enhancement for their sites.  For a more interoperable
> solution, authors can also choose to serve EOT versions of fonts to
> Internet Explorer users.

Type foundries will not license raw TTF/OTF fonts for @font-face linking. Which excludes users of "all browsers other than Internet Explorer" from experiencing non-libre fonts (legally).

Most of your email is related to EOT (Lite) and Microsoft. However, nobody expects that you do Microsoft a favor by supporting a web font format (EOT or other). It is type designers/foundries who ask for it.

> My only concern with .webfont was that font vendors were
> endorsing .webfont because it appeared to have root strings but the
> latest version makes it clear that it doesn't.

In my reading, the proposal was about the format first of all, with the content of the header/metadata being up for discussion, and accordingly it has matured over the last two updates.

> Sylvain Galineau wrote:
>> Fine. What does Mozilla propose then ? .webfont ? ZOT ? Other ? We'd
>> prefer something EOT-compatible - duh, even - but indicated many times
>> we're open to alternatives if that's what it takes, one that has the
>> support of authors and font designers. That position still stands.
>
> Great.  As I mentioned previously, both .webfont and ZOT seem
> fine to me but it needs to be a format that other browser vendors
> also agree upon.  My only concern with .webfont was that font vendors
> were endorsing .webfont because it appeared to have root strings but
> the latest version makes it clear that it doesn't.

Can we count on you?

Apple's opinion is highly appreciated too.

Best wishes,
Karsten
Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 08:55:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 11 June 2011 00:14:03 GMT