- From: Richard Fink <rfink@readableweb.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:51:13 -0400
- To: "'Christopher Slye'" <cslye@adobe.com>, "'Tab Atkins Jr.'" <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "'www-font'" <www-font@w3.org>
Monday, July 27, 2009 Christopher Slye <cslye@adobe.com>: >Any issues with CFF fonts in Win/IW/ EOT are certainly quite major in the short term (if not longer) from >our perspective. Chris, Of course we can't travel into the past and remake IE6, etc... But I do think we should get some assurances about what's going to be in IE/Windows going forward. Absolutely. Regards, Rich -----Original Message----- From: www-font-request@w3.org [mailto:www-font-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Slye Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 8:12 PM To: Tab Atkins Jr. Cc: www-font Subject: Re: Merits and deficiencies of EOT Lite On Jul 27, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > While Adobe does use CFF fonts (and has expressed that it has no > interest in releasing in any other format), I believe most foundries > distribute in TTF, at least as an option. (I know that all or nearly > all of the fonts on my computer are TTF.) So any issues with CFF > fonts are at most minor in the short term. It's a fair point, and might call into question my characterization of EOT as a "niche" solution without better CFF support. But your last sentence is certainly not true for Adobe (and any other foundry which primarily makes CFF-based fonts). Any issues with CFF fonts in Win/IW/ EOT are certainly quite major in the short term (if not longer) from our perspective. -Christopher
Received on Tuesday, 28 July 2009 01:51:57 UTC