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

RE: EOT & DMCA concerns

From: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 17:58:26 -0400
Message-ID: <E955AA200CF46842B46F49B0BBB83FF297F1DB@wil-email-01.agfamonotype.org>
To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "Thomas Lord" <lord@emf.net>, "Thomas Phinney" <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>, "John Hudson" <tiro@tiro.com>, <www-font@w3.org>
Would the name EOT-Neue or something similar alleviate your concern? Support for a new version of something doesn't imply any obligation to support older one.

Vlad


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-font-request@w3.org [mailto:www-font-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Håkon Wium Lie
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 5:35 PM
> To: Tab Atkins Jr.
> Cc: Håkon Wium Lie; Thomas Lord; Thomas Phinney; John Hudson; www-
> font@w3.org
> Subject: Re: EOT & DMCA concerns
> 
> Also sprach Tab Atkins Jr.:
> 
>  > > This is a real concern. By accepting EOTL (and not EOTC) browser
>  > > vendors accept to ship an inferior product.
>  >
>  > Only in the sense that you are currently shipping an inferior
> product,
>  > and will continue to do so.  I don't think Opera considers itself
>  > inferior for not shipping EOT.
> 
> Things change if you start supporting a "lite" version of a standards.
> People will expect you to soon start supporting the "full" standard.
> 
>  > > Microsoft marketing would
>  > > quickly claim that only they "fully support EOT".
>  >
>  > That's claimable *right now*.
> 
> Again, the comparison changes if competitors start supporting the
> "lite" version, thereby seemingly acknowleding that the standard is
> a good idea.
> 
> I don't think "EOT Lite" is such a good idea. I don't *any* standard
> should have the word "lite" in it:
> 
>   We begin with the name.  The members of the Rapporteur Group strongly
>   prefer "DSSSL Core" over "DSSSL Lite" as the name of the mandatory
>   subset of DSSSL, for two reasons.  First, "Lite" is the well-known
>   name of a particularly insipid brand of beer; and second, the term
>   "DSSSL Lite" suggests incorrectly that what is being referred to is a
>   standard parallel to and separate from DSSSL itself.  This discussion
>   is not about the establishment of a separate standard but rather
> about
>   the definition of a conformance level of DSSSL.
> 
>   http://xml.coverpages.org/dssslCore1.txt
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -h&kon
>               Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
> howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 21:59:06 GMT

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