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

Glenn Adams wrote:

 > Second, I am not saying "they shouldn't be specified". I'm saying they
 > (same-origin mandate) should not be specified in WOFF or CSS3-FONTS. These
 > are not the correct place to mandate or enforce such restrictions. 

I agree that a separate module would be better; the policy and
technology rarely mix well in the same specifiction (which is why we
ultimately dropped '!legal' in CSS, now that I think of it). A
separate module has been proposed before:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webfonts-wg/2011Jan/0037.html

Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

 > Same-origin restrictions have nothing to do with content protection,
 > as you can trivially just download the font yourself (assuming it's
 > publically accessible) and host it on your own server. 

I agree that SOR is not a crucial part of the "protection" that WOFF
provides. Therefore, I don't see why creating a separate module should
be controversial.

I can see that bandwidth leaching is an issue. However, I don't think
we will see sites leeching off others at a big scale. Leeching is
simply too fragile.

Cheers,

-h&kon
              Håkon Wium Lie                          CTO °þe®ª
[email protected]                  http://people.opera.com/howcome