- From: Adam Twardoch (List) <list.adam@twardoch.com>
- Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 05:19:20 +0100
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
First of all, I'd like to agree with what Jonathan and Thomas have said. Please keep in mind that OpenType has a worldwide adoption by far greater than any other font format available today. It has the status of an international standard (as Open Font Format, ISO/IEC 14496-22), and has successful implementations made by pretty much every software vendor. The web font formats that are under consideration today (WOFF, EOT) are strictly based on OpenType. Closed-source text layout engines that support OpenType Layout are developed by Adobe, Apple, Bitstream, Microsoft and Monotype Imaging, open-source engines are available as part of the ICU project (ICU Layout) and as part of the Pango project (HarfBuzz). None of the alternatives has even a fraction of OpenType's adoption, and as Thomas pointed out, it is very likely going to be dominant for another 15+ years. I don't think there are many reasons to remain 100% format-agnostic in CSS. I think that the current CSS3 proposal is quite pragmatic, combining a more generic approach for the most common features, and allowing a somewhat more low-level access to the less common features or their combinations. Also, this approach is quite future-proof, since it will authors to make use of new features that may be registered in future. A. -- Adam Twardoch | Language Typography Unicode Fonts OpenType | twardoch.com | silesian.com | fontlab.net Reporter: "So what will your trip to Ireland look like?" Lech Wałęsa: "I get into a car, then onto a plane, and then the other way around."
Received on Friday, 5 March 2010 04:20:00 UTC