- From: Laurence Penney <lorp@lorp.org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:25:08 +0100
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Thanks for this excellent summary, Tab. Could someone point me to the latest spec (on this list?) for CWT? I'd like to check if the OTF "flavour" of CWT[1] has been ruled inadmissible in view of CWT's claimed merit of "great compat". If it isn't forbidden, why isn't it? - L [1] unsupported by any notable user agent, as far as I know On 22 Oct 2009, at 16:45, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > Summary time! SVG Fonts should be supported on their own merits, but > really aren't a believable general solution to fonts on the web. TTF > would be nice, but the expected time-to-usefulness is the highest of > all of them, because we have no idea when or if MS will ever support > them in IE. CWT has great compat and will be usable the fastest, all > things being equal, but WOFF has the advantage of some very attractive > compression .
Received on Thursday, 22 October 2009 18:25:39 UTC