RE: WOFF without SOR?

> It undermines confidence. It might or might not be enough.

Sorry to hear that. I didn't realize this was going to be a surprise.

> I'm concerned that SOR-for-WOFF might eventually ebb away if it's not
> completely supported at the outset. You could credibly argue that Opera's
> market share is too insignificant to worry about, but if there's a
> particular market or region where Opera dominates (or comes to dominate),
> then the impact of cross-site linking becomes more worrisome. Certain
> foundries might want to concentrate on specific markets or regions, and if
> they find that Opera has, say, a 60% share there, then it's a problem.

Doesn't the cost primarily fall on web sites though ? In those locales where
Opera does especially well they're the ones who might find themselves having 
to add Referrer checks to comply with their license and/or to mitigate 
hot-linking. To the extent other browsers do this transparently for them I'd 
expect the pressure to be on Opera to conform. 

And afaik there's nothing stopping font vendors from telling customers that 
Browsers that don't support feature X may require extra work on their end. 

So while it's an annoyance, I suspect the pressure would be on Opera to align,
not the other way around. 

Do note that you'll also have this situation with WebKit for some time as well.
Their average share is larger than Opera's.

Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2011 19:34:06 UTC