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

RE: Combining ZOT with .webfont metadata

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:52:45 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>
CC: www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Message-ID: <045A765940533D4CA4933A4A7E32597E0210E235@TK5EX14MBXC120.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
>From: www-font-request@w3.org [mailto:www-font-request@w3.org] On Behalf
>Of Tab Atkins Jr.
>Not any more so than existing image formats make the value of a new
>format negative.  As long as the new format holds sufficient
>advantages over the old, it has a chance.  PNG became a standard
>against several entrenched formats due to its unique advantages (full
>alpha channel), and SVG's scaling capabilities are gradually making it
>more common as well.
>Similarly, any new font format that can offer sufficient advantages
>over EOT-Lite (native high-efficiency compression, useful metadata
>support, etc.) also stands a good chance of entering the market.  And
>really, if the new format *doesn't* offer useful advantages over
>EOT-Lite, does it deserve to be standardized?

I echo Tab and Richard's sentiments. EOT-Lite is well worth investigating as a
simple, pragmatic approach to achieving cross-browser interop in the
short to medium term. Many authors are favorable to it, some large font vendors
have past experience with EOT and others are open to Ascender's EOT-Lite proposal.
Giving it a fair, honest hearing is rational.

It could open up the market for web authors and font creators like no other proposal
currently on the table. Or it may not, but the cost of learning that - design and
development cost as well as opportunity costs for all involved - would be much lower
than any of the other alternatives as well.

But EOT-Lite is most definitely not meant to replace work on any long-term standard designed
to address the features that EOT-Lite and/or existing font formats do not support, the
needs of new client devices etc. Nor is EOT-Lite expected to be the basis for such work.

EOT-Lite only goal as I understand it is to try to leverage what's already there. If it
turned out to be enough, well....so what ?

Received on Tuesday, 28 July 2009 14:53:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:40 UTC