RE: Fonts WG Charter feedback

Also sprach Sylvain Galineau:

 > > - the new font encoding is just that: a thin
 > >   wrapper/obfuscation/compression layer on top of the current TT/OT
 > >   format; there should be no new data for browsers to deal with

 > So you're comfortable with Ascender's proposal(s) ?

Given commitment from MS to do TT/OT, I can live with this proposal:

  http://blog.fontembedding.com/post/2009/06/10/New-Web-Fonts-Proposal.aspx

This is the trickiest part:

  License information: The 'License Description' field in a
  TrueType/OpenType font can be used to describe how the font can be
  used. Font Vendors could also add information about the specific
  licensee if desired. The 'PERM' table proposed by David Berlow could
  also be added to fonts to specifically address the license
  permissions which the font vendor grants to its customers. Ascender
  supports either option. The effect of either option is to allow
  users and font vendors to better control how the font files are
  deployed, and importantly, will help communicate the need to obtain
  a license for a commercial font for web use. Enforcement would be
  the responsibility of the font vendor and not the browser or
  authoring tool, although font vendors would greatly appreciate any
  support offered by browsers in communicating the need to obtain
  licenses.

Assuming that the last sentence comes out loud and clear, I think it
will be ok. That is, there will be no new data for browsers to deal
with.

So, we have a deal?

-h&kon
              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com                  http://people.opera.com/howcome

Received on Wednesday, 1 July 2009 19:20:11 UTC