Re: CSS3 @font-face / EOT Fonts - new compromise proposal

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Levantovsky, Vladimir <
Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com> wrote:

>
> On Tuesday, November 11, 2008 5:38 PM Dave Singer wrote:
> >
> > On Nov 11, 2008, at 2:04 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Dave Singer wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I'm going to try to summarize what I think I am hearing.  I don't
> > >> necessarily agree or disagree with what this, you understand, I am
> > >> trying to get clarity in at least my own mind.
> > >>
> > >> On the 'serving' side, we are looking for an indication in
> > the font
> > >> that shows whether it's freely usable or not.
> > >
> > > It's unclear that we should be looking for this, unless
> > knowing this
> > > solves a user or Web developer problem. Does it?
> > >
> >
> > [remaining clear that this is merely a summary of what I
> > think I read, not a proposal]
> >
> > I think it's that we have to admit that both restricted-use
> > and free fonts may exist, and those making restricted-use
> > fonts want there to be some indications and support for the
> > restrictions, and those making/using free fonts think that
> > there should not be such indications or tech. support for
> > (non-existent) restrictions.
> >
>
> I think we also have to admit that the Web developer should be the only
> authority to make a decision what fonts to use and where to get them.
> Limiting them to use only free-as-in-freedom fonts would deprive them of
> their own freedom-as-liberty.


Before we get lost in rhetoric again, let us remember that existing font
formats already expose such licensing restrictions.  We don't have to invent
any new technical solution for combining a font with its restrictions.  The
only thing that is legitimately being discussed is the matter of
obfuscation: whether it is necessary and, if so, what manner of obfuscation
is optimal.

Let's keep on track here, guys!  ^_^

~TJ