W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: css3-fonts: should not dictate usage policy with respect to origin

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:30:47 -0600
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=umYLhJZPZv7ftaDNBdx_uqPgwDA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com>
Cc: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>, Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Jonathan Kew <jonathan@jfkew.plus.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>, 3668 FONT <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
Vlad,

You appear to persist in mis-reading or mis-stating what I am saying. I just
previously said:

"I believe Samsung could agree to making an authorial opt-in mechanism a
mandatory feature on UAs that access WOFF"

That translates to respecting the consideration of authors. However, if
authors do not explicitly declare a restriction, then we believe that is
tantamount to declaring that access is unrestricted. That is the current Web
model, not the converse.

So please stop implying that Samsung is pursuing this point of view from a
position of theoretical purity or lack of consideration.

Samsung is pursuing this point of view because we believe that a restrictive
default in the absence of a declaration of authorial intention is
incompatible with current Web practice, and that it represents a backward
incompatible change to such practice.

Samsung will continue to object to a position to the contrary, so please
record our formal objection to such a position in your documentation.

G.

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Levantovsky, Vladimir <
Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com> wrote:

> … or doesn’t work, as the case may be. Considering the existing and
> agreed-upon HTML design principle “consider users over authors over
> implementers over specifiers over theoretical purity” [1] – can you offer a
> particular use case that would justify your position?****
>
> ** **
>
> Thank you,****
>
> Vlad****
>
> ** **
>
> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html-design-principles/#priority-of-constituencies***
> *
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, June 20, 2011 3:18 PM
> *To:* John Hudson
> *Cc:* Levantovsky, Vladimir; Florian Rivoal; Martin J. Dürst; Jonathan
> Kew; Tab Atkins Jr.; W3C Style; 3668 FONT; www-font@w3.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: css3-fonts: should not dictate usage policy with respect to
> origin****
>
> ** **
>
> All. Because that is the way the Web works today.****
>
> ** **
>
> G.****
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 1:06 PM, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com> wrote:****
>
> Glenn wrote:****
>
> I believe we could agree to the first, but not to the second. In fact, we
> want to make the second to read as:****
>
> ** **
>
>       UAs MUST NOT, by default, treat webfont resources as
>       same origin restricted.****
>
> ** **
>
> In the absence of an author declaring either a restriction or a relaxation,
> we believe the default should be NO restriction.****
>
> ** **
>
> For all resources, or for webfonts in particular?
>
> May I echo Tab's question, and ask why? I'd like to get a clearer idea of
> whether Samsung's position is essentially a matter of principle or has some
> particular practical import for UAs.
>
> JH****
>
> ** **
>
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 20:31:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 June 2011 20:31:48 GMT