- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 13:44:21 -0500
- To: Ben Weiner <ben@readingtype.org.uk>
- Cc: www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Ben Weiner<ben@readingtype.org.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > I wrote: >> >> As I understand it, this proposal is intended to *replace* OTF/TTF font >> linking." > > Sylvain Galineau wrote: >> >> Fwiw, it was also never a goal of the EOTL proposal to replace anything, >> or even suggest that it should do so. > > Erik van Blokland wrote (on OpenFontLibrary): >> >> The webotf proposal does not state anything about replacing otf / ttf >> linking. > > OK, I thought that was an significant issue. > In fact both EOTL and webOTF proponents are happy that TTF and OTF remain as > viable formats for linking with @font-face as they are in current W3C > recommendations, and that the format is selected on its merits (like, > publisher A will license in format Y or type-designer B thinks the licence > expression is better in format Z) alone. > > Am I catching up now? You got it. The standards battle we're having is never about settling on a single format, but rather just achieving interop formats. The number of formats eventually settled on is basically irrelevant, as long as they're implemented by everybody. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 7 August 2009 18:45:22 UTC