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

Re: CSS3 @font-face / EOT Fonts - new compromise proposal

From: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:24:49 -0800
To: robert@ocallahan.org, "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, www-style@w3.org
Message-id: <p0624080dc53fd23c04af@[17.202.35.52]>

At 13:18  +1300 12/11/08, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>I'm trying to be reasonable. I was just pointing out that the 
>statement "The Web developer's choice of fonts should not in any way 
>be affected  by the technology we are developing - he should be free 
>to choose any font (free, commercial, proprietary, etc.) that 
>satisfies his needs." is untenable. We all agree that there are 
>restrictions on which technologies are acceptable, and those will 
>probably cause some font vendors to not allow Web usage, which will 
>restrict Web developers' choice of fonts.
>

I think we may be at cross-purposes here.  Designing a setup in which 
freely-usable fonts can be delivered 'unimpaired, unrestricted' and 
restricted fonts can be delivered with some 
indication/encouragement-to-observe their restrictions, is not, prima 
facie, untenable to me.

Now, if you are saying that some set of font vendors will always be 
able to say "that's not good enough for me, you cannot use this font 
on the web" I agree.  I would hope that that set is small, but it's 
only a hope.
-- 
David Singer
Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 00:26:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:16 GMT