- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 23:11:27 +0000
- To: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
> From: www-font-request@w3.org [mailto:www-font-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of John Hudson > Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:47 AM > To: www-font@w3.org > Cc: www-font@w3.org > Subject: Re: Including WOFF in ACID3 > > Håkon Wium Lie wrote: > > > > I'd like to see Acid 4 limit itself to actual W3C web > recommendations. > > > That would make the test much less valuable for interoperability > > purposes. For example, JavaScript is essential for today's web apps > > and it's not a W3C Rec. The same goes for TTF/OpenType, the payload > > which WOFF carries. > > That's reasonable, but I think the documentation of the test should > clarify the status of the individual test objects, vis ā vis web > standards, and explain what is being tested and why. Testing handling > of > TTF/OTF as a delivered payload is different from giving the impression > that the test requires a browser to support download of raw TTF/OTF > files. I strongly support that. Håkon and I chatted on the phone today and it is pretty clear that ACID3 is neither meant to be a conformance test nor an accurate reflection of real-world interop practices. Thus changes of this nature are neither really necessary nor desired. Unfortunate imo but that's what we have. I certainly support better clarity as to what these tests do and do not measure. The ACID2 guide referenced by Håkon is a good example. I consider the issue resolved on my end. Thanks!
Received on Friday, 15 October 2010 23:12:02 UTC