- From: Chris Moschini <cmoschini@myrealbox.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:07:56 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
This is in response to the existing thread but moves to discussion of the feature's use in CSS3... . Ernest Cline [ernestcline@mindspring.com] wrote: > However, these points I have raised only serve to show > that @font-face is desirable. I am unaware of two > interoperable implementations of @font-face, so unless > someone can provide them, I have no objections to the > non-inclusion of @font-face in CSS 2.1 And this I agree with. All the comments made in this thread so far make clear the feature is desirable - I believe this point needed proving - but it still should not be in CSS2.1, and only CSS3. To follow: David Woolley [david@djwhome.demon.co.uk] wrote: > IE and Netscape didn't share a common font format. > (Note the problem with creating a font format is not > describing the font, but enforcing intellectual > property rules. Microsoft's implementation > locked the font to a particular URL.) I'm surprised there hasn't been more mention of this so far. The details of this - protecting the author of the *FONT* - are what needs to be added to the standard, somehow, so that at least 2 browsers can implement @font-face consistently *and* with good legal standing. Otherwise this feature will not be properly implemented in CSS3 browsers either. Some evangelization may also be necessary, but I imagine the mere existence of this thread is enough to get the attention of Mozilla and Opera developers at least, so this is likely sufficient. -Chris "SoopahMan" Moschini http://hiveminds.info/ http://soopahman.com/
Received on Tuesday, 21 October 2003 13:08:00 UTC