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

On Wednesday, November 12, 2008 4:15 AM Håkon Wium Lie wrote:
> Also sprach Levantovsky, Vladimir:
>  > What we do know for a fact is that Adobe, Ascender, 
> Bitstream, ITC,  > Linotype, Microsoft and Monotype have said 
> it would be an  > acceptable solution, and there are many 
> more smaller foundries and  > individual type designers who 
> support these efforts.
> I support your efforts in trying to find a compromise, one 
> that all listed vendors can support. Do you think they will 
> support a scheme that is not based on root strings? And, will 
> Microsoft add support for normal TTF files in IE, as well as 
> the restricted format? If the answers to these questions are 
> yes, we're a lot closer to reaching consensus.

Hello Håkon,

I can only speak on behalf of Monotype Imaging and its subsidiaries Linotype and ITC, and we are dedicated to finding a compromise that font vendors would support. Based on the fact that other vendors I mentioned in my previous email have publicly expressed their support for EOT, it is my hope that they would be willing to accept the compromise solution we will develop. One part of the compromise solution is using access control instead of the root strings; the second part is font data compression that can also serve as obfuscated font format. I believe we are in agreement that serving compressed fonts on the web (and, thus, reducing bandwidth and storage requirements) would be equally beneficial when using both commercial and free fonts.

Best regards,

> -h&kon
>               Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª

Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 15:13:23 UTC