John Hudson wrote: > François REMY wrote: >> *Compatible* Web Font (CWF) sounds great for me. BTW, the name doesn't >> matter. Only the implementation does. > > I would prefer font to type, also, but unfortunately, the file extension > .cwf is already in use. Where does the 3 letter file extension requirement come from? I understand that MS-DOS couldn't handle longer extensions but there should not be such limitation in the Internet. How about Legacy Compatible Web Font with file extension .lcwf? -- MikkoReceived on Monday, 31 August 2009 10:08:05 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 31 August 2009 10:08:09 GMT