Re: Announcing new font compression project

On Mar 30, 2012, at 7:25 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Tal Leming <[email protected]> =
wrote:
>> On Mar 30, 2012, at 5:47 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>>> Raph, presuming that this new compression method is judged =
worthwhile --
>>>> which seems likely --, how do you see it progressing? Is this =
something that
>>>> you hope to be adopted by W3C as e.g. WOFF 2.0?
>>>=20
>>> Yes, that's the goal we're hoping for!
>>=20
>> Are you concerned that this will give WOFF, "the interoperable =
webfont wrapper", interoperability problems?
>=20
> WOFF is interoperable because all the browsers agreed to implement it.

I have a faint recollection of how that all went down. ;-)

> Our hope is that this proposal is good enough to get the same
> treatment.

What I mean is, I'm wondering about web authors having to deploy =
multiple WOFF versions of the same font to cover all browsers that =
support WOFF. Obviously WOFF 1.0 would hopefully still be supported so =
they could always use that. But, if they want the smaller files and they =
want to target older browsers, we're back to deploying multiple =
resources in a convoluted way.

Don't get me wrong. Smaller files is a great goal and the early drafts =
that Raph sent were very interesting. I just want to make sure that some =
thought has been given to avoiding creating the problem that we set out =
to solve in the first place.

Tal=