Re: New work on fonts at W3C

Dave Crossland wrote:
> I'm all for signs and fences to present to users about what their
> rights are; the problem is that EOT is an "electric" fence - a DRM
> scheme, since it requires web browsers to enforce restrictions on
> users


I realize where you are coming from. Given where I come from, I would say:

If this measure allows billions of web users to have access to thousands
of high-quality fonts, many of them meticulously optimized for best
screen rendering, many of them being potentially crucial in improving
literacy and helping preserve languages or writing systems that are on
the edge of extincion,

and finally, if this measure allows millions of web developers to
transform and expand the visual aspect of the web by connecting it to
the vast cultural heritage of world typography (including the tremendous
500 years of European printing history),

then I believe the fence, be it even "electric", is still a very small
price to pay.

Between "no freedom" and "all freedom", I choose to choose "as much
freedom as I can get", even if a compromise is required.

But that may be just me, coming from a country where the June 1989
parliamentary election was held under a deal with the communists, under
which 65% of the parliament seats would go to the communist party, and
only 35% would be "free".

Yet we all know how it developed, and there are not many people who
regret that my country has chosen that particular path.



Adam Twardoch
| Language Typography Unicode Fonts OpenType
| | |

The illegal we do immediately.
The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
(Henry Kissinger)

Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2009 16:14:57 UTC