- From: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
- Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 09:17:11 -0700
- To: Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com>
- Cc: www-font@w3.org
Some dark humor, just to lighten things up a bit... On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 16:20 +0100, Dave Crossland wrote: > Hang on. I just reread Tab and Tom Lord's posts on this, and it seems > to me they are saying there are 4 things that the W3C Recommendation > ought to be backwards compatible with, if backwards compatibility is > an important aim here: > > 1. Existing versions of MSIE > > 2. Existing EOTC-using websites > > 3. Existing versions of Firefox, Safari, and real soon Opera and Chrome > > 4. Existing TTF-using websites [....] > Tricky business! Close enough. Where the discussion has actually gone among the EOTL backers, though, strikes me as having achieved a level of irony rarely seen outside of films like Dr. Strangelove: "We needed a new format to achieve interoperability." "Yes, great idea." "So it had to be incompatible." "Incompatible?" "Yes, incompatible." "With what?" "Everything. We needed a format that nothing used and that had no other purpose." [confused] "... than to be ... incompatible." "Incompatible. To achieve interoperability." "I see. Well, actually, I don't." "Are you talking back to me?" "No sir. It's just...." "If the format was compatible with anything then programs would use these fonts. That would have broken interoperability." [stunned] "Well..." "We needed compatibility. A standard. We needed something no program supported." [confused] "...for... interoperability...." "Exactly." [cautiously alarmed] "Isn't that... and pardon me for asking but... isn't that contrary to the mission? Wasn't the goal really to explain how to make a web font that many programs would use?" "Yes! Damn it, are you paying attention? I just said, we needed a standard format for interoperability. A format, in other words, that no programs used!" [increasingly worried] ".... interesting ...." "Except Microsoft's IE." [prematurely relieved] "Oh! So it would be compatible!" "No! So it would be incompatible!" [disbelief] "Incompatible..." "Right. It had to work with IE incompatibly." [piecing things together] "So that it would be a new format that no programs use..." "Yes." "... that works with IE" "Uh-huh" "because IE has no support for it." "You've got the picture." [attempting to veil concern] "So it would be interoperable by not working with any programs. Except for IE. It would work with IE because IE doesn't have support for it." "Is this confusing for you?!?! Think like an American! This is war! Pull yourself together." "Just trying to make sure I understand." "For interoperability we needed a format that no program used and it had to work with IE because IE had no support for it." "Noted. One last question, sir." "What is it?" "If no programs used the format, except for IE which uses it by not supporting it... how would it help fonts come to the web?" "Simple, Major: we'd create a legal minefield for anyone who dared to implement the new format." "Sir?" "By discouraging implementation we could Preserve Our Essence and ensure the interoperability would last." [veiled panic] "Preserve Our Essence?" "We could make sure it stayed incompatible with everything. Except IE, which would handle the new format by having no support for it." "For interoperability...." "Major, are you aware of the communist plot to sap our precious bodily fluids by fluoridating the water supply?!?" "I can't say I was sir...." -t
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 16:17:53 UTC