RE: WOFF and extended metadata

>You are going way beyond the narrow context in which my question was posed.

>During the meeting, the question was asked: If a WOFF file has invalid XML metadata, should the entire file be rejected, or should only the metadata be rejected? I was only positing a case for the former.

You're not answering my question: what *for* ? You seem to assume it is self-evident that rejecting files on this basis is a good thing, or that it would make the web a demonstrably better place for font vendors. 
I don't see that at all and I've gone much further in order to argue in the most concrete manner possible that this case has in fact not been made. 

I don't see why I should leave authors and users hanging because someone screwed up a bit of XML neither have anything to do with. And do so after wasting CPU cycles parsing data no one will read in
the vast majority of cases. 

A trade-off is being requested from browser vendors, authors and users here. I think it's fair to expect font vendors to justify this and clearly explain what expectations they have and why and how this
proposal fulfills  them.

Received on Friday, 21 May 2010 00:07:49 UTC