- From: Gustavo Ferreira <gustavo.ferreira@hipertipo.net>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:47:56 +0200
- To: www-font@w3.org
- Cc: Erik van Blokland <erik@letterror.com>
On Jul 15, 2009, at 6:07 PM, Erik van Blokland wrote: > On Jul 15, 2009, at 5:49 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > >> Any new format, on the other >> hand, even if decided on today, will require at least half a decade >> before it's truly usable. > > This is just not true. > > EOT lite *is* a new format for Opera, Safari, FireFox. Support has > to start from scratch. So, 2014 before those apps support it you > reckon? > > A webfont wrapper as proposed (more on that in a seperate post) is > not a new format. It is a plain ttf / otf which can be offloaded to > the OS for rendering. The unwrapper code is a handful of lines in > Python, I'm sure it can be done in a single line of Perl. Supporting > EOT and it's light version require a much bigger investment in time > and testing. Regardless of what gets decided, there is no reason to > resort to imaginary arguments to dismiss things. The arguments for a wrapper with meta-information make sense to me. I'm curious about how this webfont wrapper proposal can be connected to existing efforts from CreativeCommons in creating a general legal & machine-readable digital rights expression infra-structure – something that Tom Lord's original media wrapper proposal tried to address. Related links: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking_Works_Technical http://wiki.creativecommons.org/RDFa http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/15768
Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2009 16:48:32 UTC