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

Re: Agenda, action items and suggested WOFF changes

From: Ben Weiner <ben@readingtype.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 12:43:13 +0100
Message-Id: <5856FD1C-AABD-4AC4-AA70-E2EEA4F15704@readingtype.org.uk>
To: www-font@w3.org

On 17 May 2010, at 12:19, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote:

> On Monday, May 17, 2010 5:31 AM Ben Weiner wrote:
>> On 17 May 2010, at 10:24, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote:
>>> Tools would not be required to restrict authors, just to inform them
>> of the specific conditions.
>> I don't understand how this comes within the scope of the W3C's work.
>> You are saying that if I write a script on my machine to generate a
>> WOFF it has to have an alert in it?
> If the WOFF spec should say that WOFF conversion tools must check embedding restrictions and notify a user about a particular condition, then it would have to be done for a tool to be compliant with the spec. You may chose to write a script that doesn't do it, it would simply not be considered a conformant implementation.

OK, that's fine, thank you.

I don't understand though how this comes within the scope of the W3C's work. What is the purpose of writing specifications that cover tools that play no part in the process of using  WOFF files on the web? Are there equivalent W3C specs for the tools to make HTML files? Should there be?



Ben Weiner | http://readingtype.org.uk/about/contact.html 
+44 (0) 7780 608 659
Received on Monday, 17 May 2010 11:43:47 UTC

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