- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 02:20:04 +0000
- To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, Sergey Malkin <sergeym@microsoft.com>
- CC: "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, "info@ascenderfonts.com" <info@ascenderfonts.com>, "Jonas Sicking" <sicking@mozilla.com>
[John Daggett:] > Sylvain Galineau wrote: > > > And I also believe other issues are far more important than this one. > > Today, we run into fonts that IE9 rejects in accordance with the spec > > but load fine in Firefox. > > These are fonts that should be rejected because of same origin > restrictions? If so, that's a bug and should be fixed. Do you have > examples of this? We should make sure the test suite contains any > examples that appear to be handled inconsistently across implementations. No, they are fonts that should be rejected based on WOFF conformance criteria i.e. invalid data in a table. Sergey can give you exact examples; the last one was served by Typekit. The obvious scenario here being browsers being at different levels of conformance and thus the same font loading/failing depending on the browser. And if implementing these criteria screws up pages that work today, we browser makers may find ourselves facing a strong disincentive to implement certain checks depending on their impact. (Or maybe face a strong incentive to undo one).
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 02:20:45 UTC