- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:50:06 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- CC: www-font <www-font@w3.org>
>From: www-font-request@w3.org [mailto:www-font-request@w3.org] On Behalf >Of Tab Atkins Jr. >It may be that I haven't hit the email where Sylvain suggests this, >but I thought that it was suggested that EOTL could use a version >number of 0x00020003? It was suggested as a possibility. For now, the format uses version 2, which has no rootstrings at all. As this was our goal, this is where we will start. It has been suggested rootstrings may be useful to enforce certain EULA restrictions. In the absence of actual EULAs clarifying on such restrictions, due to previous general agreement that rootstrings are a very poor way to enforce them, due to our common goal to do away with a dependency on rootstrings, the current proposal does not depend on them for any user agent. Should we decide to depend on them for legacy browsers, a 0x00020003 version number would allow that and enable us to segregate EOTL from EOT files if need be. This would address John Hudson's concern re: the edge case of EOT files loaded as EOTL.
Received on Friday, 31 July 2009 13:50:48 UTC