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

Dave Crossland wrote:
> 2008/11/12 Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>:

>> Dave, I would respectfully submit that this statement
>> is your personal opinion rather than a fact.
> 
> This is my understanding of what ROC said in the other thread. The
> dialogue can be located by searching for the string "metal"

Dave, if this is the quotation to which you refer :

> No way. If a Web developer insists on using fonts from 
 > Foundry X, but Foundry X won't allow Web use unless
 > browsers implement TCPA-style down-to-the-metal DRM
 > which also happens to be covered by royalty-licensed
 > patents --- too bad for the Web developer and Foundry X.

then I regret that I do not see the relevance.  It
consist of a number of hypotheses that, taken together,
do not refer to "Enforcing functionality based on metadata
("Digital Rights Management")" in general but rather to a
very specific instance thereof, the crux of which hinges
on royalty-licensed patents.  I certainly cannot see how
it supports your assertion that "Enforcing functionality
based on metadata [...] isn't acceptable for web technologies."

Philip TAYLOR

Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 13:52:58 UTC