- From: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:37:38 -0400
- To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
On Thursday, October 22, 2009 10:16 AM Sylvain Galineau wrote: > > If supporting those formats real web authors will actually need to deal with > for some time constitutes unnecessary work, and blessing the one format that > hasn't shipped yet and may not reach critical mass for years is the best > we can do then I have to wonder what we need a working group for, never mind > the purpose of this entire discussion. I believe that the goal of the working group *is* to specify the format(s) that hasn't been shipped yet to promote its implementation and interoperability between browsers. Just because something didn’t happen yet doesn't mean that it shouldn’t happen in the future - this is exactly where the WG efforts would create most value. To the contrary, whatever has already happened is the reality we live with, and while the WG has to consider it in order to enable web authors do what they need to do sooner rather than later, I don’t see the need to simply rubberstamp any of the existing solutions unless it promotes interoperability. Regards, Vlad
Received on Thursday, 22 October 2009 14:38:30 UTC