On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk> wrote: > > > Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > > No, I mean it quite literally. Our level of happiness would be strictly >> increased by allowing only free font linking, because right now we have *no* >> font linking. We would be happy with this. We would by *happier* with >> commercial fonts as well, but *any* font-linking is an improvement that >> would make our lives better. >> >> If you have no cake, then a bite of cake makes you happy (if you prefer >> relative terms, "happier than before"). A whole slice would be better, but >> that bite is still better than no cake at all. >> > > That still begs the question "who is 'we'" ? > Philip TAYLOR > Web designers. Again, our current situation is no fonts at all. Unless you can come up with some designers who are actually happier with no font-linking than they would be with only-free-font-linking, I think I'm correct in my usage of the pronoun. Again (again), I would certainly be *more* happy if commercial fonts were available as well and reasonably easy to use. But some fonts are better than no fonts, and I don't think it's possible to make a reasonable argument to the contrary. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2008 16:58:52 UTC