- From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 11:05:17 +0200
- To: <rfink@readableweb.com>
- Cc: "'Dave Crossland'" <dave@lab6.com>, "'Thomas Phinney'" <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>, "'www-font'" <www-font@w3.org>
Richard Fink writes: support for the "open" standard actually leads to higher costs for all concerned [..] the OTF must be pre-processed and obfuscated [and this] inflicts considerable inconvenience and additional cost. As much or more than using WEFT to create an EOT file [..] Fat or lite. Using WEFT, authors had to scan their HTML pages to create EOT files. This was highly inconvenient and proably the major reason why nobody used it. You're saying that the solutions in development will be even more inconvenient? -h&kon Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Saturday, 18 July 2009 09:06:11 UTC