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

Re: FW: EOT-Lite File Format

From: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 12:22:43 -0700
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1249327363.7120.75.camel@dell-desktop.example.com>
We get to the heart of the matter!

On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 14:14 -0500, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Thomas Lord<lord@emf.net> wrote:

> > An EOTC file with a non-nil rootstring has a
> > version number distinct from EOTLs and apparently
> > an EOTL processor MUST reject that file.
> 
> If it only support EOTLs, yes.  If it supports EOTC as well, it must
> process it as an EOTC file, *not* an EOTL, if it wants to be
> conforming.
> 
> I have no idea how this is opposite, or even relevant to, what I said, though.

Then the version number, the XOR bit, and the MTX
bit in an EOTL file serve as a DRM mechanism.
That is why consensus and passage over Objections
is unlikely.  It would be a very bad precedent for
W3C.


-t
Received on Monday, 3 August 2009 19:23:24 GMT

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