- From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 12:30:33 -0700
- To: www-svg@w3.org
I wanted to bring forward my strongest disagreement with Mozilla's stance against SVG font support. Their stance has been shared by Robert O'Callahan (roc) several times. They do not want to see SVG fonts used as an alternative to WOFF. WOFF is certainly more powerful and expressive. And I understand that SVG fonts do not support various items that would make them a worthwhile alternative -- such as supporting semantics to render full color emoji. That said: there is a high barrier to entry when working with binary formats. I can't -quite- be helped with PNG, but SVG does do something about that -- it allows hand coding of images in ASCII format, and it still permits raster images to be included. There is a high barrier to entry for designing and generating WOFF. I understand that programmers such as myself can setup web services to convert an SVG font into WOFF. I can even write it on the client side. But man that's a lot of work, and I don't expect new users to find it easily or palatable. Meanwhile: creating an SVG font is as easy as creating an SVG. It can even be debugged right there, in real time, in the browser. One could easily write a program to allow drawing in SVG, and exporting those glyphs as an SVG font. All of this is ASCII/DOMString compatible. WOFF is not. It's not easily interchanged, not easily supported on the server-side. With all due respect to WOFF, it's far too formal for many basic use cases. I know that Mozilla is aware of the formalism. I suspect they've held their ground because they believe the formalism forces a level of accessibility not otherwise attainable. I believe in accessibility for the end user. But I'm afraid, when taken too far, it means burdensome obfuscation for the author, the speaker. I urge Mozilla to reconsider SVG Fonts for the sake of authors. Authors who may be trying to support minority scripts, minority languages and special cases and sociolects for fonts. It's just so much easier to use SVG Fonts for basic cases than to go through the necessary actions to use WOFF. Again, I know there's no hinting, and all that other stuff. It's really not been an issue in -any- of the use cases I've had for SVG Fonts. In contrast, compiling and working with a complex binary format, that has been an issue. I'm very experienced with what I do, but it's still a lot of work for me. I consider that an undue burden on other authors trying to support glyphs. -Charles
Received on Monday, 31 October 2011 19:30:54 UTC