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

Re: EOT Lite (Compatibility Web Type) - sample web pages

From: Jonathan Kew <jonathan@jfkew.plus.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 21:55:19 +0100
Cc: <info@ascenderfonts.com>, <www-font@w3.org>, "'Sylvain Galineau'" <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "'Tal Leming'" <tal@typesupply.com>, "'Erik van Blokland'" <erik@letterror.com>
Message-Id: <DCB1AB44-7A43-41C6-84C4-30575C1E2090@jfkew.plus.com>
To: <rfink@readableweb.com>
On 8 Sep 2009, at 21:19, Richard Fink wrote:

> Tuesday, September 08, 2009 Jonathan Kew <jonathan@jfkew.plus.com>:
>> Sorry, Mozilla "try-server" builds expire after two weeks, so this  
>> is no
> longer online.
> Jonathan,
> Color me confused and concerned. I've been using the Minefield build  
> with
> EOTL support all weekend, freshly downloaded from here:
> https://build.mozilla.org/tryserver-builds/jkew@mozilla.com-try-cdcb63f9c65c
> /try-cdcb63f9c65c-win32.zip
> But I had a bit of trouble with using the raw files all by  
> themselves and,
> first, had to use the windows installer package of Minefield located  
> here:
> https://build.mozilla.org/tryserver-builds/jkew@mozilla.com-try-cdcb63f9c65c
> /install/sea/try-cdcb63f9c65c-win32.installer.exe
> I installed it under a separate profile to prevent messing up my  
> other FF
> installs, overwrote the contents of c:\program files\Minefield with  
> the
> zipped files, and it's been working great.
> Thanks. What a pleasure not to have to bounce back and forth between  
> IE and
> FF.
> I've just written about EOTL (or should we begin calling it CWT at  
> this
> point?) at http://readableweb.com and was going to follow up in a  
> few days
> with instructions for those looking to install Minefield and if  
> those files
> are going south I'd really like to know. If they do disappear, are  
> the ones
> I've downloaded redistributable?

I'm not aware of any fundamental restrictions (though I am not a  
license expert); however, I would <strong>STRONGLY</strong> discourage  
it. That was a purely experimental build created using a (somewhat)  
quick-and-dirty patch to an unstable development codebase. I'd hate to  
see it "promoted" as anything more than that. I'm pretty confident  
that whatever Mozilla eventually decides to ship will NOT be fully  
compatible with that experiment, so spreading it around would be a  
recipe for confusion and frustration.

> Further along these same lines, I understand from
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=507970
> that you've done a build with WOFF support. Great. However, although  
> I know
> you've published the spec, is there, as yet, a tool for converting  
> TTF or
> OTF files into WOFF files for testing?

The sample code package that I posted (alongside the spec) included  
source for such a tool. However, the spec has been continuing to  
evolve through ongoing discussions among the authors and others (new  
version should be ready to post Real Soon Now), and the code is  
evolving to match. So again, I think it would be highly premature to  
go spreading this around more widely than those directly involved in  
the discussions and tests.

When we have something more definite to say/show, you'll hear about  
it. Patience, please... :)

Received on Tuesday, 8 September 2009 20:56:55 UTC

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