- From: Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:49:13 +0900
- To: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>, "John Hudson" <tiro@tiro.com>
- Cc: "W3C Style" <www-style@w3.org>, "3668 FONT" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 02:55:38 +0900, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com> wrote: > I'm broadly in agreement with this approach. My preference is for > > a) the From-Origin header to be formally drafted and proposed, and to > find an appropriate home in W3C recommendations, and > > b) for this to be normatively referenced in the 'Webfont Conformance > Specification'. > > Our concern at the moment is that we don't want to remove all reference > to same origin mechanisms from draft webfonts documents while they > remain uncovered elsewhere, because we have good reason to suppose that > this will shake confidence in the WOFF model among some stakeholders. > Many font vendors have begun licensing fonts in the WOFF format on the > reasonable assumption, after two years, that some form of same origin > restriction will apply to them. > > I suspect that drafting the chartered 'Webfont Conformance > Specification' will be a priority for the WG now. I agree this is probably the way to go. There is only an editor's draft so far for the From-Origin header, but that's already better than the blog entry you and I pointed to earlier. http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/from-origin/raw-file/tip/Overview.html - Florian
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 07:50:03 UTC