W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Clarification on WOFF & MIME

From: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:38:58 -0500
Message-ID: <CAO6Fj1V60sONbndiJw7RApgnf0zz=L2mcJks0hzDCFO7zU3b4A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com>
Cc: Michael J Kormendy <mike@somethinginteractive.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
We were just discussing this among the engineering staff at Extensis the
other day, and the conclusion was that having a real, dedicated MIME type
for WOFF and fonts in general would be a good thing, from our POV.

I can get somebody to write up the reasoning if that would be helpful, but
I'm assuming that the W3-font group has already done so.

T

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Levantovsky, Vladimir <
Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com> wrote:

>  The media type “application/font-woff” has been discussed and approved
> by the W3C WebFonts WG, and as such is now the part of the WOFF spec.
> However, to the best of my knowledge, it has not yet been registered with
> IANA.****
>
> ** **
>
> There have also been numerous discussions about the need to register the
> top level media type “font” and, if this happens in the future, we may see
> a whole new hierarchy of media types for fonts. I will bring this up again
> for WebFonts WG discussion to see if there is a real need / interest in
> registering the top-level ‘font’ type and will report back on this list.**
> **
>
> ** **
>
> Regards,****
>
> Vladimir****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Michael J Kormendy [mailto:mike@somethinginteractive.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 27, 2012 11:14 AM
> *To:* www-font@w3.org
> *Subject:* Clarification on WOFF & MIME****
>
> ** **
>
> I need clarification on the best server settings for MIME types for WOFF file format.****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
>  ** **
>
>  I've done some research on the MIME type standards for web-fonts and I've come up with a pretty solid list of MIME type settings for my server as based on the Internet Engineering Task Force who maintain the original documentation on MIME types in general:****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
>  ** **
>
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045#section-5****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
>  ** **
>
>  This is my MIME type list as publicized in the Stack Exchange forum:****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
>  ** **
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
> svg  as "image/svg+xml"****
>
> ttf  as "application/x-font-ttf" or "application/x-font-truetype"****
>
> otf  as "application/x-font-opentype"****
>
> woff as "application/x-font-woff" ****
>
> eot  as "application/vnd.ms-fontobject"****
>
>  However, someone suggested that WOFF should be set to applicaton/font-woff based on the W3C standards in the document maintained here:****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
>  ** **
>
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF/#appendix-b****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
>  ** **
>
>  Would it be prudent to go so far as to add the W3C recommendation to my list in the following formatting (avoiding any browser warnings, errors, or inaction that may occur do to improper MIME settings)?****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
>  ** **
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
> svg  as "image/svg+xml"****
>
> ttf  as "application/x-font-ttf" or "application/x-font-truetype"****
>
> otf  as "application/x-font-opentype"****
>
> woff as "application/x-font-woff" or "application/font-woff"****
>
> eot  as "application/vnd.ms-fontobject"****
>
>  ** **
>
>  Any guidance on this would be much appreciated.****
>
>  ** **
>
>  Thanks,****
>
>  ** **
>
>  Mike Kormendy****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
>


-- 
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through
our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that
democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’”
 —Isaac Asimov
Received on Friday, 28 September 2012 20:39:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:37:36 UTC