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

Re: Merits and deficiencies of EOT Lite (was: Combining ZOT with .webfont metadata)

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:09:03 +1200
Message-ID: <11e306600907271709y5e0e0588y1b5ecf25b0750a16@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
Cc: Christopher Slye <cslye@adobe.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Thomas Phinney
<tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>wrote:

> 1) Existing IE versions don't support EOT files with OpenType CFF
> contents (though the EOT format is agnostic as to CFF vs TT contents).


It's not just an IE problem. Uniscribe at least up to Vista doesn't work
with dynamically loaded CFF fonts. (John Daggett will correct me if I'm
wrong.) We might be able to work around this in some future Firefox version
by shipping our own shaping engine.

2) Windows default system rendering of OpenType CFF (and Type 1) fonts
> is kinda stinky. Adobe worked long and hard with Microsoft to get
> better rendering of OpenType CFF (even with ClearType support!) into
> the WPF rasterizer, but AFAIK no browser is using that rasterizer.
>

That's because only .NET applications can use it.

Rob
-- 
"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah
53:5-6]
Received on Tuesday, 28 July 2009 00:09:37 GMT

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