Re: Agenda, action items and suggested WOFF changes

Vlad wrote:

> 5.       Add the following language to address font embedding permissions:
...
> In general, it is assumed that 
> the level of font embedding permissions is set according to original 
> font license, and that web authors have made adequate efforts to make 
> sure that the font license and font embedding permission settings 
> correspond to intended use of a font on the web.

I think this sentence is problematic because it implies some kind of 
relationship between font embedding bits, the font license, and use of 
that font on the web. The concern expressed by font makers regarding 
embedding bits is that they *cannot* be assumed to correspond to any 
intended use of a font on the web.

I propose this revised text:

	User Agents MUST NOT check the level of font
	embedding permissions set in a font delivered
	using WOFF format. In general, unless set to
	‘Restricted License Embedding’ it cannot be
	assumed that embedding permissions in the
	font OS/2 table fsType field correspond to
	licensing of fonts for use on the web. Web
	authors are therefore expected to have made
	adequate efforts to make sure that the font
	license corresponds to the intended use. User
	Agents MUST NOT permanently install fonts
	delivered in a WOFF format as system resident
	fonts, and SHOULD only use downloaded fonts to
	render the content of a webpage that WOFF
	resources are associated with.

	WOFF creations tools MUST verify that a font
	converted to the WOFF format does not have
	font embedding permissions set to ‘Restricted
	License Embedding’, and SHOULD generate an error
	message when this condition is encountered.
	Fonts that have “Restricted License Embedding”
	set as the only level of embedding allowed
	MUST NOT be converted to WOFF format.


In other words, embedding bits are considered irrelevant to WOFF unless 
they explicitly forbid all modification, embedding or exchanging as 
described in the OT/OFF spec.

JH

Received on Monday, 10 May 2010 22:11:18 UTC