- From: Laurence Penney <lorp@lorp.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:55:47 +0100
- To: www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Thanks John, that's useful. (I was going to follow up with similar thoughts, but based on supposition - I could not bear to use WEFT on a broad range of fonts.) To foundries wondering about the benefits of MTX compression on their own fonts, I suggest they perform tests using WEFT on the fonts they guess their customers are going to want on the web, subsetted to Latin 1 as well as complete, before declaring font-specific compression essential. Is there a command-line tool that could be released for this purpose (and others)? One question to which I'd be interesting in hearing answers from foundries is this: if you've fielded enquiries for web fonts, have those enquiries been mainly for headlines or for text? - L On 21 Jul 2009, at 21:12, John Daggett wrote: > Laurence Penney wrote: > >> It seems to me the benefits of Monotype's Microtype Express >> compression are being oversold. > > There was a related thread back at the end of June: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-font/2009AprJun/0002.html > > John Daggett > Mozilla Japan > > >
Received on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 20:56:24 UTC