- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:49:25 +0000
- To: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@googlemail.com>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.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>, Sergey Malkin <sergeym@microsoft.com>
[Jonathan Kew:] > Yes, this is certainly true. There are a number of examples in the test- > suite collection that currently load in Firefox, but should be rejected > according to the spec. > > (This goes both ways: I've also seen fonts that load in IE9 Preview, but > are rejected by Firefox. IIRC, the Jester font used in the HTML5 Blizzard > demo is not WOFFed properly, for example, and is correctly rejected by > Firefox.) Oh yes, I'm sure the reverse is true as well. I'm just more worried about this scenario - font X loads in browser X but not in browser Y - than the one whereby one or two browsers don't enforce the same-origin policy. The latter, at this point, is an annoyance but it is within the power of a web author to figure it out and fix it.The former is rather much harder for them. Trying may even violate the terms of their license... And it's natural we run into these at this point. I don't think we can avoid a transition period where this will happen. > > > I think the key here is to assure that those cases are captured in the > > test suite, then we can be assured that all implementations will > > reject correctly. > > Right. Tal has made huge progress on the suite, and as implementers we > each need to test our work against this and drive towards full conformance. Yes. Huge progress is the technical term (thanks Tal!).
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 14:49:58 UTC