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

Re: CSS3 @font-face / EOT Fonts

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:38:04 +1300
Message-ID: <11e306600810191538y4ff78e85wbb78251de52c6eb9@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Alex Mogilevsky" <alexmog@microsoft.com>
Cc: "bert@w3.org" <bert@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 4:41 AM, Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@microsoft.com>wrote:

>  Silverlight 2 is in fact different, and I think I can explain how
> different. I am not sure however why this argument would have any value
> (beyond being embarrassing for Microsoft, which has already been
> established).
> If there is an existing implementation that is different from what is a new
> standard being proposed, why would it affect the proposal?
When designing any new feature, it's useful to examine other solutions in
the space; this helps clarify requirements as well as the merits of possible
solutions. So I think it's important to understand why Silverlight does not
require or even support EOT, especially since it's the chief EOT proponent's
main Web platform initiative.

[The explanation given so far, that Silverlight content does not quality for
EOT because it's 'applications' not 'documents', makes little sense given
the modern Web has pretty much erased that distinction. Would you prevent
use of EOT by GMail or argue that GMail not an application? Also, that this
explanation emerged long after the question was raised, which was long after
Silverlight was designed, suggests that it may be a rationalization rather
than an explanation.]

In particular, one of the claims made by EOT supporters is that supporting
font files served as bare TTF would devastate font vendors, therefore there
is a hard requirement on IE to *not* support bare TTF. I think we should
understand why Silverlight is exempt from this requirement.

It's especially important to clear this point up, since many people fear
Silverlight is treated differently because Microsoft favours its proprietary
platforms over open ones. Perhaps you can agree that this fear is not
irrational [1].

[1] http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/2000/PX02991.pdf

"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah
Received on Sunday, 19 October 2008 22:38:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:40 UTC