W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2008

RE: Font MIME types

From: Paul Nelson (ATC) <paulnel@winse.microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 14:45:16 -0700
To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D92F7E6A79E88B4684BFC067AE15477D29910BEEF4@NA-EXMSG-S702.segroup.winse.corp.microsoft.com>

By definition an application that handles an EOT file format must handle OpenType fonts. The EOT is compression and wrapping of an OpenType font.

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Bert Bos
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 5:40 AM
To: www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: Font MIME types


David Woolley wrote:
>
> Håkon Wium Lie wrote:
>
>>   Content-Type: font/truetype
>>   Content-Type: font/opentype
>>   Content-Type: font/type1
>>   Content-Type: font/type3
>>   Content-Type: font/cff
>>
>> Do these make sense? Which other formats should be listed?
>
> SVG, various X font formats, Windows bitmap fonts formats, etc.

I agree that these should all have Media Types, but I'm not sure W3C can
define them. W3C is indeed a standards body as required by IANA rules,
but such a standards body may only register MIME types for its own
standards.

In other words, if we make EOT a Recommendation, we can easily include a
section in the spec that defines a media type for it. (The IESG must
still approve the type, but if the spec passes W3C's process, there is
no reason why the IESG should find problems in it.) But for the other
formats, either the bodies that standardized them have to create the
media type, or somebody has to write (an Internet Draft and then) an RFC
for them, following the usual IETF process.

Another question is if the the top-level should be "font/". Convincing
the IETF to accept a new top-level type will be a long process. A name
such as "application/eot" will no doubt be easier.

>
> As you are distinguishing between type1 and type3 PostScript fonts, you
> probably need to distinguish between EOT and basic OpenType.  (The only
> reason you would want to distinguish between type1 and type3 is for
> content negotiation, so you may want to consider the effect on the
> length of the HTTP Accept header.

Yes, I think EOT and OpenType need to be distinguished somehow in the
media type. An application that can handle one doesn't necessarily
handle the other.



Bert
--
   Bert Bos                                ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/
   http://www.w3.org/people/bos                               W3C/ERCIM
   bert@w3.org                             2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93
   +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92            06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Tuesday, 20 May 2008 21:46:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:06 GMT