Re: WebOTF Proposal

On 7 Aug 2009, at 19:04, John Hudson wrote:

> Laurence Penney wrote:
>> It seems a shame to disallow font formats other than OpenType...
> From the look of the proposal, unless I'm missing something, any  
> sfnt font would work, yes? I just want to clarify this because,  
> although the format is described as WebOTF, it would work just as  
> well with AAT or Graphite sfnt fonts, yes? [Not making any  
> assumptions about system support for those layout models once the  
> font gets displayed, only seeking to confirm whether such fonts  
> could be put into a webOTF format.]

Yes, any sfnt can be packaged this way. This is a repackaging of  
"OpenType the Font Format", as distinct from anything to do with  
"OpenType the Text Layout Model". (I wish the term "OpenType" weren't  
so overloaded. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen users,  
and even developers, utterly confused by it.)

Maybe "websfnt" would be a better label, except that I don't think the  
term "sfnt" is nearly as well known.


Received on Friday, 7 August 2009 18:15:35 UTC