RE: Not replacing OTF/TTF linking

> From: [] On
> Behalf Of Ben Weiner

> 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?

Correct. Raw TTF/OTF is not expected to go away. It's out there and it works.
But as authors should be able to also use commercial fonts on the web if they
want to - and many do - and as font vendors are not comfortable licensing their
products in its raw format, we seek a solution to maximize author choice and
improve interoperability. At this point, a wrapper format seems to be the best
way to achieve this.

That would be my one-floor elevator pitch at any rate. Others' may be slightly

Received on Friday, 7 August 2009 19:00:01 UTC