RE: New work on fonts at W3C

H�kon Wium Lie [mailto:howcome@opera.com] wrote:
Also sprach Chris Wilson:
>> 3. (linking to "standard" TTF/OTF files) As previously indicated, I
>> don't see any way to make this palatable (without requiring
>> additional bits in the TTF/OTF that say this usage is allowed, that
>> would not be set in most commercial fonts - e.g. "does not work
>> with any current fonts, freeware fonts would have to be updated.")
>
>So, you're arguing that other browser -- who currently support open
>formats -- should add support for an obfuscated format, but Microsoft
>-- who currently supports an obfuscated format in IE -- is not willing
>to support open formats in IE?

Kindly do not twist my words.  I did not say Microsoft "is not willing to support open formats in IE" - which is a purposefully incendiary comment.  I said that I did not believe that THIS particular format, utilized in THIS particular way (which was certainly not part of its design goals when created) can be made palatable without changes (which are, obviously, not present in the fonts that are already deployed on users' machines).  As an aside, when I said "palatable" I was referring to the font development community as well as Microsoft.  We have been attempting to spark a GOOD open solution to the font issue for a couple of years now.  I understand you disagree with what might constitute a good solution; however, attempting to equate this disagreement with a general statement of "Microsoft is not willing to support open formats in IE" is not only disingenuous, it is personally offensive.

-Chris

Received on Monday, 29 June 2009 16:43:05 UTC