- From: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
- Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:42:29 -0700
- To: www-font@w3.org
I agree with those who argue that conformance criteria need to be defined, and my personal opinion is that both "2 of 4" and a point system are not much better than no criteria at all (for which or how many formats constitute conformance); both of the former approaches relies heavily on the goodwill and common sense of implementors. If you're going to rely on that so heavily, you don't really need the formal conformance criteria. Either do nothing or specify (at least) one format that is required for conformance. I prefer the latter: Dave C's "real spine." (NOTE: I agreed with Dave Crossland on something! Sweet!) However, I could see leaving the definition of conformance to the actual Fonts WG, as suggested by Vlad. Cheers, T
Received on Tuesday, 27 October 2009 14:43:01 UTC