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

Re: EOT-Lite File Format

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:59:17 +1200
Message-ID: <11e306600907301659l27cff5cfq106d3b185297d50@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
Cc: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 11:44 AM, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com> wrote:

> Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
>     3. Set the embedding level to one of 0x0000 (installable), 0x0004
>>    (preview and print), 0x0008 (editable), 0x0100 (no subsetting)
>>
>
>  Seems to me it would be simplest to require the EOTL embedding level bits
>> to be exactly 0x0008. The other values don't make sense for Web fonts.
>>
>
> 'Editable' implies that the content of the website set using this font is
> editable by the user. This is certainly the case with much web text -- even
> posting comments to a blog would qualify --, and will probably become more
> common, so I'm inclined to agree that 0x0008 meakes sense as a default
> embedding bit for web fonts.
>
> However, the print and preview embedding level also makes sense in the
> context of served content that is not editable by the user, and this setting
> is pretty standard for non-web fonts from many foundries. If editable
> embedding is to be standard for web fonts, it will have to be explained to
> foundries why this is so.
>

If the font is not licensed for "editable", what should happen if someone
sets "contenteditable" on the BODY of an HTML document that happens to be
using such a font? "contenteditable" could be set by script in the page, or
by the user using a Firefox extension, including just Firebug, or by the
user typing "javascript:document.body.setAttribute('contenteditable','')" in
the URL bar, or via a bookmarklet. Or the page could be loaded as an IFRAME
in another page, and the other page sets contenteditable in the IFRAME's
body.

Or what if the font is not licensed for "editable", and someone implements a
DIY HTML editor that listens for keystrokes and inserts characters into the
DOM? These exist, Bespin for example.

Basically "editable" on the Web is a slippery concept, and in a real sense
everything can be considered editable. Even if you come up with a definition
of "editable" that makes sense and allows for significant pages that aren't
editable, it would almost certainly be extremely painful for browsers to
deal with.

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 Thursday, 30 July 2009 23:59:58 GMT

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