W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: Agenda, action items and suggested WOFF changes

From: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 19:40:36 -0700
Message-ID: <4BEA1524.2030307@tiro.com>
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
CC: Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com>, public-webfonts-wg@w3.org, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
Sylvain Galineau wrote:

> But if the vendor, in some cases, allows you to convert your TTFs, why do we 
> need to decide which embedding bit(s) allow this conversion ? We're adding
> an extra step for font and tool vendors for what exact benefit ? What if a
> font vendor like Adobe want to allow thousands of existing customers to convert 
> some of their catalog to web use but they don't have the right bits set currently?
> Should their future tool prevent their customers from doing that ?

The point of a bit is to protect fonts that are not licensed for web use 
from being converted into WOFF files. It's up to the font makers to 
decide how best to set the bit in terms of their business model, 
anticipate future needs etc. It's a direct parallel to document 
embedding tools and existing embedding bits, but necessarily independent 
of those because of the practical and legal distinctions between 
document embedding and web font linking.

JH
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2010 02:41:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:37:34 UTC