RE: Fonts WG Charter feedback

On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 00:16 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Thomas Lord [] wrote:
> >On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 23:56 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >> Not sure why that would be the case.  If it enables more fonts to be licensed for web use, then why would they object?
> >
> >Because "more fonts" in your sense is a transient
> >concern and in this case it comes at high expense
> >to users.  It is the opposite of what a reputable
> >standards party should do.
> I don't know why you think licensing is a "transient concern."

Sir, are you an honest debater?

If so, why do you equivocate my "'more fonts'"
with your "licensing"?

Have you failed to notice what prominance
I have given to licensing in my wrapper 
proposal, or are you deliberately obfuscating
at this point?


Received on Friday, 3 July 2009 00:23:14 UTC