- From: Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:49:13 +0900
- To: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>, "John Hudson" <tiro@tiro.com>
- Cc: "W3C Style" <www-style@w3.org>, "3668 FONT" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 02:55:38 +0900, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com> wrote:
> I'm broadly in agreement with this approach. My preference is for
>
> a) the From-Origin header to be formally drafted and proposed, and to
> find an appropriate home in W3C recommendations, and
>
> b) for this to be normatively referenced in the 'Webfont Conformance
> Specification'.
>
> Our concern at the moment is that we don't want to remove all reference
> to same origin mechanisms from draft webfonts documents while they
> remain uncovered elsewhere, because we have good reason to suppose that
> this will shake confidence in the WOFF model among some stakeholders.
> Many font vendors have begun licensing fonts in the WOFF format on the
> reasonable assumption, after two years, that some form of same origin
> restriction will apply to them.
>
> I suspect that drafting the chartered 'Webfont Conformance
> Specification' will be a priority for the WG now.
I agree this is probably the way to go. There is only an editor's draft so
far for the From-Origin header, but that's already better than the blog
entry you and I pointed to earlier.
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/from-origin/raw-file/tip/Overview.html
- Florian
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 07:50:02 UTC