- From: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
- Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2010 00:01:54 -0700
- To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
- CC: public-webfonts-wg@w3.org
Regretably, I may miss this week's phonecall. I am working late tonight, may need to sleep and would, in any case, probably not be very cogent. Re. agenda item 1, I am basically in agreement with what Vlad wrote re. the note in section 1 and how it relates to the preceding reference to the CSS Fonts spec. Within the context of the note, I am happy for either 'should not' or 'must not' to be used with reference to unwrapped font files being 'installed or otherwise made available for use by other processes or documents on the system', but agree with what I understand to be David Singer's suggestion that the wording of the note should reflect the wording of the CSS Fonts spec referenced in the text above. I also agree with Håkon that if all notes are considered non-normative then this should be stated somewhere in the text. A paradox: if a note states that all notes are non-normative, are they really? Perhaps we need a note saying 'All notes except this one are non-normative'. :) JH
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2010 07:02:30 UTC