- From: Dirk Pranke <dpranke@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 18:35:41 -0700
- To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, May 04, 2010 2:26 AM Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> >> On Tue, 04 May 2010 15:12:49 +0900, Robert O'Callahan >> <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: >> > Yes, there was a big kerfuffle over video. A few reasons why video is >> > probably different from fonts: >> > a) video is huge, so much more likely to need CDN support or at least >> to >> > be placed on dedicated servers. Fonts are much smaller so it's >> generally >> > going to be easy to serve a font on the same server as the rest of >> the >> > normal page content. >> >> I just checked cnn.com and it seems to be using CDN for style sheets. >> If >> it is using them for style sheets it seems likely it would use them for >> fonts too, as they are typically larger than style sheets. >> > > Can you please elaborate a bit more on this whole issue? It seems that CDN should be completely transparent for UA, and that content and resources such as CSS and fonts would appear to a browser as coming from the same origin it was requested, regardless of whether CDN is used or not. So, if content is in fact comes from CDN - how does it affect same-origin restriction? > If you go to 'www.cnn.com', the CSS files are served from 'i.cdn.turner.com', which is a CDN (presumably) on a different origin than the requesting page. This type of usage is extremely common, because the CDN gets a different (usually smaller) set of cookies than the origin server (and hence the requests are usually received faster). -- Dirk
Received on Wednesday, 5 May 2010 01:36:12 UTC