- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 14:14:20 -0500
- To: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
- Cc: Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Thomas Lord<lord@emf.net> wrote: > On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 13:16 -0500, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > >> I am not a lawyer, as I stated before. However, EOTL does not *allow* >> you to ignore rootstrings, it *requires* you to. > > The opposite is apparently the case. > > An EOTC file with a non-nil rootstring has a > version number distinct from EOTLs and apparently > an EOTL processor MUST reject that file. If it only support EOTLs, yes. If it supports EOTC as well, it must process it as an EOTC file, *not* an EOTL, if it wants to be conforming. I have no idea how this is opposite, or even relevant to, what I said, though. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 3 August 2009 19:15:16 UTC