RE: Including WOFF in ACID3
Ian Hickson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.fonts |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010, Sylvain Galineau wrote: > > Note that @font-face is just as optional as TTF or WOFF support, or, > > indeed, CSS support, or HTML support. Browser vendors pick what they > > want to implement. No technology can be mandated; it's a free market. > > All we can do is check that once you try to support a technology, you > > actually do so in a manner that is consistent with that technology's > > specification. You cannot mandate that WOFF be implemented. The market > > decides that. > > No more than you can mandate that TTF be implemented. Correct. > The market decides that as well. So why should one be tested and not the > other? At the time the test was written, there was no WOFF. > Not only has the market decided but the more relevant part of the market > - the people who license fonts - are largely in favor of WOFF. So I > don't quite understand how that is an argument to leave WOFF out. It was not intended to be an argument either way. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'