On 25 December 2012 20:26, Dave Crossland <d...@lab6.com> wrote: > On 25 December 2012 16:09, Alexandre Prokoudine > <alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I'd start with a better question: what place in the modern ecosystem >>> should OFLB be aiming at? >>> >>> When we started it, there was no TypeKit, no GFS, no half a dozen >>> other web fonts foundries. >>> >>> What makes OFLB special today, apart from free-as-in-speech typefaces? >> >> I also think Alexandre's question is a very important one that >> needs an answer before we proceed in any direction. The one >> advantage OFLB has is that typeface authors become the >> curators of their own fonts, which we don't see so much on, >> say, Fontsquirrel, Kernest, or Google. > > I think Daniel is correct. > > What sets OFLB apart from FontSquirrel and GWF is that Ethan and I are > gatekeepers for those services, deciding what is uploaded to each, > whereas OFLB is 'self service.' > > I think it would make sense to add a 'link' object that points to > projects that are hosted and developed elsewhere (DejaVu, Libertine, > etc etc) so that OFLB really IS a 'library' - a complete index of all > libre fonts on the web that presents the fonts in a way that is > pleasant to browse. > > I think the features of www.openhatch.org are also good, in that they > help people to become involved. OFLB can help type designers to set > out a project's roadmap and invite people to participate on particular > tasks.
Continuing to noodle on this, I suppose we (I) should reach out to the users and ask them what they want out of OFLB.