Re: WOFF and extended metadata

On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Levantovsky, Vladimir <
Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com> wrote:

> I agree that if there is nothing to show, or if metadata is junk, UA should
> present some kind of error message. How this is done is definitely up to a
> UA. The critical point that I am trying to make is that in order for user to
> *be* able to *see* font information UA *must be* able to *show* it. I
> understand that some UA may not have such a capacity (e.g. printer with no
> UI), but I believe it is important for the WOFF spec to clearly say what the
> metadata is for, and what browsers should (must?) do to enable users to see
> this information, if they so desire.
>

To repeat myself: if you can't persuade browser vendors to provide such UI
on its own merits, trying to coerce them by legislating UI through the WOFF
spec is futile. They'll ignore it and the credibility of the WOFF spec will
be damaged. Please don't do this.

The spec should stick to issues that affect interoperability, such as the
syntax and semantics of the metadata.

Rob
-- 
"He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah
53:5-6]