W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2009

Re: New work on fonts at W3C

From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:14:34 -0400
Message-ID: <7c2a12e20906160914q5442ea57v6bc84a779157f25e@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com>
Cc: Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Levantovsky,
Vladimir<Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com> wrote:
> The important point is that we seem to agree we need a universally supported web font wrapper that would allow to put "signs and fences" to reduce a risk of font piracy to a level that would be acceptable for font foundries.

It seems to me like the primary issue is the "universally supported"
part.  And particularly, getting a format that Microsoft, Mozilla, and
preferably Apple are all willing to support.  A standard that isn't
supported by at least Microsoft and Mozilla is not very useful, or at
least not more useful than EOT or OpenType alone.

I think various people from Mozilla have laid down their requirements
fairly clearly.  The format must be fully and openly specified, and
must not be patent-encumbered (with or without field-of-use
restrictions).  It also preferably shouldn't (or must not?) contain
restrictions that are part of the font file itself, since these might
raise DMCA issues.  This is my recollection of what the people from
Mozilla have said in the past.  I would think that if IE supported a
format that met these requirements, Firefox would most likely be
willing to support it too.

We've heard a lot from various representatives of font foundries on
their requirements.  But has Microsoft said anywhere what their
requirements are for supporting a format?  I haven't seen the sort of
clear statements from Microsoft that I've seen from Mozilla (but that
might just be me).
Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2009 16:15:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:18 GMT