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

Re: EOT & DMCA concerns

From: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 12:28:40 -0700
Message-ID: <f49ae6ac0908051228k4de55dcnc522226d07655fdc@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
Cc: Jonathan Kew <jonathan@jfkew.plus.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Thomas Lord<lord@emf.net> wrote:

> The proponents argue for EOTL with same-origin+CORS.
> The rationales:
>
> 1) A required conversion step by authors
> acts as a low garden wall.

I have never heard this argument until now, and I do not believe that
font vendors are concerned about that particular direction of usage.

> None of those stands up to scrutiny.
...
> UA and desktop
> implementers will surely automate the conversion
> step for downloaders.

Beyond the UA's own needs for making the fonts work, which may indeed
involve conversion and placement in the browser cache, what evidence
do you have for this statement? What UA maker or desktop OS vendor has
said they want to or are even willing to "automate the conversion
step" back to desktop fonts for users downloading web fonts?

On a not-unrelated note, I think I need to figure out how to get Gmail
to do a killfile....

T
Received on Wednesday, 5 August 2009 19:29:30 GMT

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