- From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 22:36:03 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> We've had a *lot* of discussion of this section, the fact that >> fonts are basically same-origin restricted with CORS to relax is >> simply a way of emphasizing what the definition of "potentially >> CORS-enabled fetch method" with "Anonymous" mode implies. >> Superfluous, maybe, but I don't see why you would label this as >> "wrong". I think it's important to keep the wording explicit here, >> given all the back-and-forth about this. > > I'm saying it's confusing. Having it discussed a lot does not make > the wording any clearer. And the wording is vastly different from > anywhere else in the platform where we do something similar, e.g. > with <track> elements. Nowhere do we make it this difficult to read > that all that is required is that fonts are fetched using CORS. I've revised this section along the lines you suggested: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-fonts/#font-fetching-requirements There's now a small piece of normative text along with a note to explain the implications of the normative text to authors and some examples. The examples have been revised based on the implications of using the potentially CORS-enabled fetch method as defined in HTML5. Do these changes resolve your concern? Regards, John Daggett
Received on Monday, 19 August 2013 05:36:31 UTC