- From: Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:49:40 -0400
- To: "Brad Kemper" <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Aryeh Gregor" <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, "Jonathan Kew" <jonathan@jfkew.plus.com>, <www-style@w3.org>
On Wednesday, June 24, 2009 2:47 PM Brad Kemper wrote: > > On Jun 24, 2009, at 10:52 AM, "Levantovsky, Vladimir" wrote: > > > On Wednesday, June 24, 2009 1:19 PM Brad Kemper wrote: > >> > >> > >> No, but that won't change until Microsoft starts supporting the same > >> formats as Firefox, Safari, and Webkit. If they are going to start > >> supporting font formats that they don't currently support, then they > >> should start with OpenType and TrueType, absolutely. > >> > > > > This is exactly the problem I am trying to solve. Why is that someone > > has always have do what someone else has done, even if there is no > > consensus for it. > > Because by definition, if there is no consensus, then someone hasn't > done it yet. Because consensus might never be achieved, and life moves > on while we wait for one, and authors would like to get started with > the very workable solutions currently available. Because there is near > consensus among implenters about the value of supporting raw file > formats, with the one major exception being the company that is nearly > always lagging in standards support (for about the last decade anyway). > You forgot to mention font vendors who do not support raw file format, so the company you mentioned isn't really a one major exception. > > > We could be much better off if we get out of the trenches and adopt a > > position that, as Aryeh said, may not be ideal but can work and would > > satisfy all parties involved. > > Great! Glad to hear that you will now be supporting Daggett's scheme, > and that Microsoft will be concentrating the @font-face improvement on > supporting regular formats as well as the other implentors are. > Speak for yourself. And you apparently missed the last part of the sentence, I did say that a solution "would satisfy all parties involved". If you truly want the web to become a better place, then the position "you go ahead and do something so I don't have to" is a non-starter. This is how I see John D. proposal with regard to font renaming - I don't think Monotype would allow this. I do hope though that we can have a progress and more constructive discussion.
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 19:50:38 UTC