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

Re: Rumours of the death of "new, professionally designed typefaces" are perhaps exaggerated?

From: Ben Weiner <ben@readingtype.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:47:13 +0100
Message-ID: <4A7722A1.40803@readingtype.org.uk>
To: www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Hi,

John Hudson wrote:
>
> So instead you pretend there is some magical divide between free fonts 
> and non-free fonts. The idea that there should be multiple formats to 
> reflect the difference in IP or licensing status -- i.e. naked fonts 
> for free fonts and some different, probably wrapper format for 
> non-free fonts -- strikes me as daft. 
Agreed, it's daft, but I feel it is sad that an existing, working and 
simple technological solution that is within the current W3 
recommendation has to die off solely to get font software publishers on 
board. Makes them look like martinets, whatever the reality.

> You don't solve licensing differences via format differences: you find 
> a single format that allows different kinds of licensing.

Well, perhaps. I thought for a while that single format could be OTF/TTF 
with a wrapper to express the licensing. Some others seemed to agree 
this had merit.

Cheers,
Ben

-- 
Ben Weiner | http://readingtype.org.uk/about/contact.html
Received on Monday, 3 August 2009 17:47:54 GMT

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