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

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

From: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 07:49:29 -0800
To: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <6D096C8718FA4241B934489A5E1CE1420118E2DE6347@nambx04.corp.adobe.com>
> 4) Even if free fonts tend to be a lot worse in some respects, it has
> been admitted here that some high-quality professional fonts are
> freely licensed (even if they weren't openly developed in the first
> place).  That number can only possibly increase, since fonts that are
> freely licensed are not likely to be un-licensed (they can't be, if
> free means as in speech).  So any lack of font quality is likely to be
> of limited duration anyway.

The conclusion is not a logical consequence of the antecedents.

There are literally several thousands of high-quality retail font families. Currently there are singles or at most a couple dozen high-quality free font families. The latter number could increase at a pretty healthy rate, and still not come close to the former number for a century or two. Or ever, if the growth rate of the former continues to be vastly higher.

But I still consider this a side issue. Web designers want to be able to use retail fonts, and they want to be able to use most any font. Ergo, a solution which doesn't make font vendors happy won't make web designers happy either.

Cheers,

T
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2008 15:58:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:17 GMT