Re: Fonts WG Charter feedback -- iNDIFFERENT OBSERVATION

On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 01:17 -0700, Thomas Phinney wrote:

> I'm no longer representing a type foundry, but I can predict how most
> of them will react....
> 
> Having raw TTF/OTF as a required format is only of any interest if
> some more foundry-friendly format is also a required format.
> Otherwise, they are $c&!'ed.


Really?  Even with same-origin+CORS?

I'm a little bit alarmed because EOTL w/same-origin+CORS
doesn't seem to provide any protections at all that
won't be provided by TTF/OTF w/same-origin+CORS

EOTL w/s.o.+CORS is arguably even worse if IE<=8
doesn't get patched to add s.o.+CORS.

But if IE<=8 is going to be patched it could just
as well be patched to add TTF/OTF at the same time.

-t

Received on Friday, 7 August 2009 01:30:30 UTC