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

Re: Format name proposals

From: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 13:07:13 +0300
Message-ID: <4A9BA0D1.1000303@peda.net>
To: www-font@w3.org
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?

-- 
Mikko


Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 10:08:05 GMT

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