W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2011

Re: css3-fonts: should not dictate usage policy with respect to origin

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:34:02 -0600
Message-ID: <BANLkTim3-M5sYM_m6fN9J=1w3sJvjHZAkA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: Tab Atkins <tabatkins@google.com>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, Vladimir Levantovsky <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com>, "liam@w3.org" <liam@w3.org>, StyleBeyondthePunchedCard <www-style@w3.org>, "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>, "Martin J." <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Let me ponder this new information (to me) on the motivation for SOR on
fonts. I now see the source of the backlash against exceptions in the spec,
as well as the argument for specifying this in css3-fonts and woff. Too bad
I didn't have this background information earlier. I'll get back to the
group in a few days about whether we will be able to drop our FO. Note that
even if we drop it, I fully expect some external specs to explicitly remove
(willfully override/ignore) the SOR requirement when making use of
css3-fonts and woff. But there isn't anything the W3C can do about that.


On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> On 6/30/11 7:01 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
>> if this argument applies, then the same logic driving SOR on font
>> fetches should be used on every type of fetch, including images
> That would be ideal, yes.  We'd like to move there, for sure.
> In the face of the large deployed base of cross-origin-referenced images,
> though, that's not feasible, yet.
> But that "large installed base" argument does not apply to new types of
> loads, which is why new types of loads are tending to be defined with
> cross-origin restrictions and CORS in mind.  This is not specific to fonts.
>  however, I have asked what is special about fonts that requires SOR that
>> does not apply to text/plain, image/png, application/xml, etc.
> Nothing.  What's special about fonts that _allows_ the restriction is lack
> of significant existing deployment depending on the unrestricted behavior.
>  And it's not even that special to fonts.
> -Boris
Received on Friday, 1 July 2011 00:34:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:02 UTC