Re: Double standards in restrictions on downloadable fonts

I am really an outsider to this W3C work group, haven't subscribed to
this public list for all that long and completely oblivious to internal
politics of W3C.  That said,  I would like to thank Ian for speaking out
on this issue -- regardless of what W3C work group information is
considered "appropriate" for the general public.  I think openness is a
good way achieve meaningful results in the development of web standards
and secrecy is good for other interests.  Judging by the level of
standards support in IE, I don't understand why Microsoft participates
in this process at all, other than to be to standards what the US is to
the UN.  Web standards should not be used as another avenue to create
(anti)competitive advantages for this company or any other.  Perhaps
this work group should consider a new policy, where if internal
discussion ends in deadlock, the matter is taken public?

As far as the fonts issue is concerned.  Just a brief look at EOT is
enough to conclude that embedding TTF is the right way to go.


Daniel Glazman wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> There was no confidential information in the mail I sent out. Maybe if you
>> didn't spend so much time trying to protect Microsoft, and spent a little
>> more time worrying about what would be the best for the Web, the CSS
>> working group wouldn't be in such a mess.
> This message is *TOTALLY* unacceptable.
> </Daniel>

Aleksey V Lazar
Website Developer
Memorial Library 3010
Minnesota State University
Mankato, MN 56001
Tel. 1-507-389-2480

Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2007 15:19:21 UTC