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: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 16:30:28 -0700
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>, Chris Fynn <cfynn@gmx.net>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, Ben Weiner <ben@readingtype.org.uk>
Message-Id: <1249601428.6082.109.camel@dell-desktop.example.com>
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 16:02 -0500, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Thomas Lord<lord@emf.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 14:26 -0500, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> >
> >> > None of the other browser makers want to implement
> >> > the protection features of that proposal.  If
> >> > people who currently have restricted license fonts
> >> > in the wild in EOT were to assert that other browsers
> >> > should go ahead and implement EOT but without any
> >> > kind of enforcement, some other browser implementers
> >> > would likely still object but the case in favor would
> >> > at least be a lot stronger.
> >>
> >> Do you have any reason to believe that authors in the wild would ask
> >> for that?  Or is this just part of your charming hypothetical?
> >
> > Not exactly either.  Rather:
> 
> So, to answer the question I posed: no, you don't have any reason to
> believe that.  Why did you pose such a scenario if you don't believe
> that it's true?

As I explained, because of the brick wall of an 
impasse towards which EOTL is speeding. The 
suggestion is for a significant step towards
breaking that impasse.

You went on to say that you don't believe that impasse
exists - that I am the only one concerned about 
EOTL's connection to EOT.   There have been many
messages on the list that contradict your belief.

-t
Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 23:31:08 GMT

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