- From: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 14:08:28 -0700
- To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Cc: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Aryeh Gregor<Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:16 PM, John Hudson<tiro@tiro.com> wrote: >> Perhaps because you -- and many other people in this debate -- seem only to >> consider the browser market? > > Because the browser implementers are the ones who decide what formats > they'll support. All other parties are therefore pragmatically > irrelevant except insofar as they can get the browser implementers to > agree with them. You could replace "browser implementers" with "font owners" and the statement would be equally true. The only difference being that the critical mass percentage is a bit different. For browsers, you need both IE and Firefox and preferably Safari as well. Everything else is window dressing. (I write that even though I use Google Chrome myself, just being pragmatic.) For font vendors, there's no specific critical mass. Cheers, T
Received on Friday, 3 July 2009 21:09:04 UTC