Re: Next step?

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote:
> The conformance document would be brief, would reference the font
> formats in existing use (OpenType, WOFF, SVG, and EOTLite) and the
> font referencing and linking specifications (in both CSS and XML
> serializations), and require implementation of at least one linking
> mechanism and *at least two* formats, for compliance. There appeared
> to be consensus on www-font that requiring at least two formats gave a
> fair and even playing field and maximized interoperability.

I don't think I can agree with this; I don't believe there was any
consensus of the sort.  Requiring 2 of the 4 does nothing to guarantee
interop - as written, I think Opera already complies, yet it doesn't
support WOFF *or* CWT yet.

There may have been consensus to support 2 *specific* formats -
namely, WOFF and CWT - but supporting 2 from a list of 4 just
gratuitously allows poor interop while claiming standards compliance.

I'd prefer a requirement of WOFF and CWT support, while allowing
support for further formats.

~TJ