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?


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:41 UTC