- From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:35:33 +0200
- To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- Cc: www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Also sprach John Daggett:
> > > Some of the redundancy is shared with CSS; the @font-face declarations
> > > contain information about the format and the name of the font (to be
> > > used in 'font' and 'font-family'). What if there is a mismatch between
> > > the format declared in @font-face and inside the info.xml? The
> > > .webfont specification should specify who is right.
> >
> > We think that the CSS would specify "webfont" as the format. The User
> > Agent would look at the format specified in the info.xml and load it
> > appropriately. We thought that this would actually make it easier for
> > web authors. They wouldn't have to know the specifics about the core
> > font formats.
>
> Both Håkon's original remark and Tal's response aren't quite right
> here. The names and styles specified in @font-face rules are
> *completely* under author control, neither the name table contents or
> info.xml contents have or should have any effect on font usage or
> rendering.
Right. However, they will often be the same so it makes sense for the
spec to say they are, indeed, different.
-h&kon
Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Sunday, 26 July 2009 21:36:20 UTC