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

Well if you like to go asserting, then I shall assert as well: the burden of
proof should be on you that SOR is required to obtain interoperability for
CSS3 Fonts functionality; if you can demonstrate that SOR functionality
pertains to CSS3 Fonts functionality, then I will gladly withdraw my
assertion.

You say "improve the situation". What situation?

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>wrote:

>  Two browsers implement SOR interoperably. Two others do not. What other
> evidence is needed ? The burden is on you to prove that specifying it in
> another document without any mention of it in CSS3 Fonts is more likely to
> improve this situation. The implicit claim that more specs results in better
> interop seems dubious to me, at the least.****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Glenn Adams
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 20, 2011 11:32 AM
> *To:* Christoph Päper
> *Cc:* W3C Style
>
> *Subject:* Re: css3-fonts: should not dictate usage policy with respect to
> origin****
>
>  ** **
>
> I would like to see evidence of how specifying or not specifying SOR aids
> or detracts from "CSS3 Fonts interop". I have seen no evidence to date. The
> functionality of CSS3 Fonts is unaffected by, and entirely orthogonal to SOR
> or fetch/access algorithms.****
>
> ** **
>
> G.****
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Christoph Päper <
> christoph.paeper@crissov.de> wrote:****
>
> Sylvain Galineau:****
>
> > The right place to define requirements needed to achieve CSS3 Fonts
> interop is the CSS3 Fonts spec.****
>
> Sure.****
>