Re: .webfont Proposal 2

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Tal Leming<> wrote:
> On Jul 17, 2009, at 2:54 PM, Thomas Phinney wrote:
>> Tal, Erik, would it be a requirement of .webfont format that if such a
>> URL is present, browsers enforce it?
> As the proposal said, we are interested in hearing from the browser
> developers on two possible ways of handling the <allow> element:
> 1. An unobtrusive alert system based on matching the viewed URL to the
> <allow> element. This is not the same as complete rejection of the fonts.
> 2. A "Page Info" interface element that would show the contents of the
> <allow> element, along with the other relevant metadata, to the user upon
> request.
> On idea 1, John, Sylvain and Håkon seem to have indicates that they could
> not accept this.
> On idea 2, John seems to have implied interest.
> Tal

Righto, thanks!


"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up
and hurry off as if nothing ever happened."
- Sir Winston Churchill

Received on Friday, 17 July 2009 19:40:23 UTC