- From: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
- Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 10:09:50 -0700
- To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- CC: Christopher Fynn <cfynn@gmx.net>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>, Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
Sylvain Galineau wrote: >> Then, as part of that spec, we would have a table to hold a machine >> readable license, different sets of embedding bits (for document, web, >> pdf, e-book, etc, use) - fields to hold such data as serial number and >> so on, and whatever else font foundries and vendors think they need, all >> held right in the font. > Several browser vendors object to enforcing rules embedded in a resource; whether rootstrings or embedding bits, this is > Something that has been discussed and rejected a number of times afaik. The objection, as I understand it, is to a web fonts standard that *obliges* browsers to enforced embedded rules or permissions. The browser makers can have no objection to the presence of such data in a font, since the font file format is beyond their remit. There is value to putting such data into fonts even if the browsers ignore it completely; there are also circumstances in which browser makers may opt to at least expose this data, since it is of benefit not only to font vendors but also to web publishers. In commercial use, fonts add value to content and design; as such, they represent an investment on the part of the publisher and the illegitimate use of the same fonts by another party is unfair competition to the honest web publisher. John Hudson
Received on Monday, 6 July 2009 17:10:35 UTC