And I never said I expected it. Not expecting it is not equivalent to not wanting it. We don't expect it, but we want it, for reasons of forward interoperability. There is nothing unreasonable about having such a desire. G. On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: > >> >> >> - Samsung believes the issue is whether an existing implementation of >> @font-face that does not employ same origin can claim conformance to a >> final, published REC that wishes to apply the same origin mandate to all >> implementations, whether new or old; the issue of whether such an old >> implementation is "experimental" or merely "early" is unrelated to our >> concern, since it is desirable to (finally) have a complete and final >> specification for @font-face that can be referenced by industry compliance >> testing and compliance certification processes; >> >> > No-one can expect an implementation that predates a REC to conform to the > REC. (Sylvain, Jonathan and others have already pointed this out.) > > Rob > -- > "If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not > in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us > our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not > sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us." [1 John > 1:8-10] >
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 02:07:18 UTC