- From: Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 22:00:16 -0700
- To: WOFF Working Group <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
On 24 August 2010 12:22, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote: >> Question: 2.3 What about other webfont formats such as >> EOT/EOTLite/CWT/etc.? >> >> Answer: In most cases these formats alter the original font data more >> than WOFF, and do not completely support appropriate metadata, so >> their use must be considered modification and RFNs may not be used. > > It's true that EOT does not have WOFF's metadata support, claiming that > EOT alters the original font data more than WOFF is puzzling. Surely, > prepending a header to the original file and compressing the whole thing > is less of an alteration of the font data proper than extracting each > table and compressing each individually. Yes, I thought this was curious too - because the WOFF specific answer says that using WOFF _without metadata_ means no renaming requirement. Since web font services use automated conversion systems for WOFF and EOT, I think this is important to clarify. SVG Font conversion is more tricky, since that is a not a straightforward compression.
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2010 05:01:08 UTC