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 13:13:50 -0700
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1249330430.7120.86.camel@dell-desktop.example.com>
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 14:38 -0500, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> Um, no.  EOTC is not an earlier version of EOTL.  EOTL1.1 is
> completely independent; it currently refers interested parties to the
> EOTC spec to give some historical basis for the padding sections.
> 
> IE does not render EOTL files, it renders EOTC files.  The EOTL format
> is just created in such a way that (nonconformant) legacy IEs
> interpret them in such a way.  Future IEs, and other browsers, will
> correctly distinguish between the two formats.

Do I understand you correctly if I think
you are saying, in effect:

"EOTL is downward compatible (by design) with existing
EOTC processors while it also has certain bits
to distinguish EOTL from EOTC -- but in spite of
that we don't call it a `new version' of EOTC"?

More succinctly, are you saying that it is
not a new version of EOTC "in name only"?


> You also haven't addressed just what rights are being managed by
> ensuring that a file is formatted correctly before attempting to
> render it.

The right to render an EOTC file.

-t
Received on Monday, 3 August 2009 20:14:31 GMT

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