- From: Jelle Bosma <jelleb@euronet.nl>
- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 97 12:50:12 +0100
- To: <www-font@w3.org>
>From: MegaZone, megazone@livingston.com >BFD, they should have gotten it right to start with. MS screws up, but >not this time. Whining about IE is a cowardly, braindead move. Suck it >up, admit the foundaries screwed the pooch, and get it right from now on. >2. I don't agree that they need to fix anything. Now, my understanding is >that if the bit were set correctly on the font in the first place, IE is >no less secure than any other application using the same fonts. The issue >is the fonts being downloadable as a distribution system and then being >hijacked and kept. But if the font foundaries had set the bit correctly >to start with it wouldn't be an issue. It looks to me like the foundaries >made the mistake, and now you're whining that MS needs to bail them out >but adding *another* level of control to supercede the one there now. If font foundries have set the embedding bits to view/print only the they have the right to expect that the font is treated differently then wen the bits are set to installable embedding! If IE treates view/print embedded fonts which such sloppyness that they can easily be kept and used then the foundries have all the right to whine: They have set the bits correctly! Jelle Bosma Monotype Typography Ltd.
Received on Friday, 24 October 1997 06:50:25 UTC