- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 22:01:51 +0100
- To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- CC: www-font@w3.org
Hello Bert, In this email http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-font/2011JanMar/0009.html you said: > 1) I'd like to say one more time that letting a URL carry > information about the meaning of a resource is counter to W3C's > common architecture for the Web and simply a bad idea. If I move a > file to a different server (and hopefully leave a redirect behind), > the file still means the same thing. If I distribute it over p2p, on > a CD, or coin a URN for it, it is still the same file and should not > act any differently. Going against this architecture *will* lead to > problems. > > And it's not like we don't know how to do it right. The way to encode > usage metadata for fonts, in a protocol-independent and machine > readable way, was invented by Microsoft for EOT more than ten years > ago. The exact syntax doesn't matter, but the data has to be at the > application level, not in the URL and not in the protocol. Vladimir responded, asking you for clarification http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-font/2011JanMar/0025.html and so did I http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-font/2011JanMar/0046.html Could you please respond to those questions, as we don't really understand the point you are making. -- Chris Lilley Technical Director, Interaction Domain W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups
Received on Wednesday, 16 March 2011 21:01:54 UTC