W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2011

Re: css3-fonts: should not dictate usage policy with respect to origin

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:38:34 +0200
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5d1m071rfii165fogogpmneu9uqmgrr6rs@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Sylvain Galineau wrote:
>You’ve formally objected before making any substantial attempt to
>present a coherent point of view and obtain a group consensus for or
>against your preferred course of action. Negotiating after preemptively
>slamming the biggest door in the room is no easier than building
>consensus under threat. Attempting both at the same time was a
>significant tactical blunder on your part. Your mistake.

Glenn Adams presented an entirely coherent point of view right at the
beginning of this thread and indicated that he wishes the decision to
include the requirements as they are currently proposed to be reviewed
by an independent third party should it stand. That is entirely reason-
able and appropriate; there was no threat, no slamming of doors, quite
the contrary as far as I can tell from reading the thread.

There is nothing unusual about the concern raised either, you seem to
be arguing for "interoperability" among of handful of web browsers in
what restrictions they implement and what related technologies they im-
plement, while Glenn Adams seems to be arguing that others should not
be bound to such agreements between a few web browser vendors by way
of css3-fonts compliance. That's a rather common theme and usually re-
resolved by separating concerns appropriately.

As far as I am aware CSS 2.0 and implementations of it support using
fonts across "origins" without "CORS", and there are implementations
that do not support using fonts across "origins" and they do not have
"CORS" support either. I have not seen a coherent argument why such im-
plementations must be non-compliant with css3-fonts beyond that some
web browser vendors want their competitors to do nothing differently.

So, so far I would certainly agree that whether some product supports
"CORS" or supports using fonts across "origins" should not affect con-
formance of that product to "css3-fonts", just as whether it supports
EOT fonts or the "data" URL scheme should not affect conformance to
"css3-fonts", just as cross-origin background-image support should not
affect CSS 2.1 compliance.

Look, the "user agent profile" crowd always clashes with the "indepen-
dent technologies" crowd like this and it's very easy to avoid simply
by keeping the profiles separate from the independent technology specs.
We do that all the time precisely to avoid wasting so much time and
goodwill for what is ultimately a non-issue because the profile crowd
is so small and already in agreement that they do not need this in any
specification at all; it's more of a reading aid for web authors, and
I am quite sure they would prefer if the thousands of dollars that have
been lost on this 120+ thread would have been spent on more test cases.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 12:39:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:41 GMT