- From: Daniel Will-Harris <Daniel@Will-Harris.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 20:46:57 -0800
- To: chris@w3.org
- Cc: erik@netscape.com, "Jelle Bosma" <jelleb@euronet.nl>, www-font@w3.org
>> in that fonts themselves must have the Panose numbers >> embedded in them, > >Point of correction - this is completely untrue. > >There is no requirement to have this information in the font at all. It can >be placed in a font descriptor in a stylesheet. Same for the x-height and >other descriptors. Thanks for clearing that up. I would imagine, however, that adding it all in a stylesheet could make them large if you included many fonts for substitution. If you only had a few faces, like Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica, no, that doesn't take much space. >Feedback that I have received from web designers - in answer to my "why >don't you use the CSS2 WebFonts feature" (of which the Netscape/Bitstream >PFR embedding is a partial implementation) mainly centers around four >perceptions. > >1) they feel the tool costs to much (around US$300) That's true. >2) they are concerned over the legality of transmitting these derived fonts I am only concerned about EOT because in its current implementation, it's so easy to pull out usable truetype fonts, without any technical knowledge. I could see concerns about embedding Type 1 fonts, since they don't have embedding bits. >3) they want one mandated format that is universally supported, rather than >having to make .pfrs for Netscape and .eot for IE PFR's are supported by both Netscape and IE (at least in the current versions). >4) they dont like the rasterisation/hinting/kerning/some other aspect of >the downloadable fonts and would rather get the exact pixels they like and >send down an image This isn't the answer, especially for the readability of type, because different screens have different resolutions so sending exact pixels is not always going to look good on a variety of devices. The same problem occurs when fonts are set in pixels or points now, something that makes it extremely difficult for site visitors to adjust them comfortably for readability. ]) /\ |\| | (- |_
Received on Thursday, 27 January 2000 23:47:09 UTC