2008/11/3 Brendan Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I have joined the development mailing list. Waiting for my fist mail.
Which dev list? :-)
One note of concern that I will research. If someone starts with a .html
file and adds php content, then uploads it and renames it to .php, a script
could
In a message dated 11/3/2008 12:33:38 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi, FontFreedom,
... but I really want to have a non-copyleft
openfontlibrary.
Why?
If we are not using copyleft licenses, what are you proposing to use in
place?
Copy - Center licenses, Such as:
2008/11/4 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
designed specifically to help these authors protect their works so
that they can do what they really want to do with them -- share them
with the community!
NO! SIL OFL does not allow them to share their fonts in a way which allows
others to make modifications to a
2008/11/4 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It's what's been used with many fonts currently in the openfontlibrary. Some
people have said their (software, font, clipart, whatever) is public
domain, then attached conditions which are totally incompatible with
dedicating something to the public domain.
I
2008/11/4 Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Do not trust the OFLB license labelling.
I've updated the site to warn people to check font files themselves, eg,
http://openfontlibrary.org/media/files/tarzeau/321
___
Openfontlibrary mailing list
Hi,
I've bought these domains just now:
openfontlibrary.info
oflb.info
oflb.org
I suggest we make all the domains redirect to oflb.org and get that
promoted as the main URL, then fewer new people will think to go to
openfontlibrary.com.
Or is that risky? The current domain has some
2008/11/4 Christopher Fynn [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The CC-BY License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
This license requires attribution - and for any *reuse* or distribution,
requires that the original license terms must be made clear to others.
Does this mean if someone uses a font
2008/11/4 Christopher Fynn [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The re-use of name logo is at best bad form...
Its a sad move, they could use something else,
I suggest them publicfonts as the name :)
We need developers!
Yes he certainly does,
:) All the best, as mentioned in mails above.
--
H
IRC :
Sounds like you are an expert around here :-)
But I have not done any coding in 4 years..
Brendan
___
Openfontlibrary mailing list
Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
Hi,
Dave Crossland wrote:
2008/11/3 Brendan Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Getting the
file onto the server is the first big step in launching an attack.
We can set the webserver to send files for download, so neither the
webserver or webbrowser will interpret them.
So could we
We can set the webserver to send files for download, so neither the
webserver or webbrowser will interpret them.
I imagine that even if the files are set for download, they will be
interpreted. If say I setup a GIF for PHP to run through it, and then
force the download header, it will
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 08:20 +, Dave Crossland wrote:
2008/11/3 Ed Trager [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The PHP getId3() library is at http://getid3.sourceforge.net/. It
might be worth looking into how to expand this library to recognize
the TTF and OTF file headers, perhaps? The idea here
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 2:02 AM, Rob Myers wrote:
Is the name a problem, project identity-wise?
I do foresee general confusion, but I won't argue over that till I'm
blue in the face. I have better things to do. I just hope that
initiator of the second project is
Nicolas Spalinger wrote:
I also hope there will be a reasonable resolution to this with no bad
consequences for the momentum of the OFLB.
The re-use of name logo is at best bad form...
A breach of copyright :-)?
He says:
We felt a split, and/or rebellion was needed.
although, as far as I
I disagree. We make it clear what fonts should be under. And, if one
submits their fonts and not under the terms allowed, we should delete
the fonts and/or look to support the option if their is sufficient
uptake for the license after review.
The last thing we need is license proliferation,
Hi, Chris,
Releasing a font under GPL or OFL license simply ensures the font can
freely be used or modified by anyone and that no one can claim
proprietary or commercial rights.
If somebody does want a similar font to sell under a commercial license
I'm perfectly willing to develop one for
2008/11/4 Christopher Fynn [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The re-use of name logo is at best bad form...
A breach of copyright :-)?
Well, trademark :-)
We need developers!
Yes he certainly does,
LOL
___
Openfontlibrary mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 11/3/2008 12:33:38 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi, FontFreedom,
... but I really want to have a non-copyleft
openfontlibrary.
Why?
If we are not using copyleft licenses, what are you
Dave Crossland wrote:
2008/11/4 Jon Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 09:24 +, Dave Crossland wrote:
2008/11/4 Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Do not trust the OFLB license labelling.
I've updated the site to warn people to check font files themselves
I disagree. We
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NO! SIL OFL does not allow them to share their fonts in a way which
allows others to make modifications to a font, then re-release the font
under the license of their own choosing.
As the developer of a font on OFLB (Jomolhari) I don't mind others
modifying my
2008/11/4 Brendan Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This is not really my area of expertise. I was primarily a php
programmer who made websites, content management systems and such.
Also did website design using DHTML and Usability.
Sounds like you are an expert around here :-)
The extent of unix
Just because of one person we should change urls? I don't agree
whatsoever and its bad SEO tech and bad policy to move that easily.
Good to have other domains, but all you need is one clear canonical url
and not confuse people.
Jon
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 12:39 +0300, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
2008/11/4 Brendan Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Say, will any of the font source files read like a unix script file with #!/
as the first bits of information in the file?
Maybe. There is a font on OFLB now that is a SFD and has a
makeOTF.sh file uploaded too. I forget which one though :(
On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Dave Crossland wrote:
I suggest we make all the domains redirect to oflb.org and get that
promoted as the main URL, then fewer new people will think to go to
openfontlibrary.com.
I personally don't understand why openfontlibrary.com is a good domain
for public
Jon Phillips wrote:
Just because of one person we should change urls? I don't agree
whatsoever and its bad SEO tech and bad policy to move that easily.
I agree with Rejon here about the SEO part. Having font in the domain
name is a good boost for our position in search results.
Good to have
2008/11/4 Jon Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 09:24 +, Dave Crossland wrote:
2008/11/4 Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Do not trust the OFLB license labelling.
I've updated the site to warn people to check font files themselves
I disagree. We make it clear what
2008/11/3 Ed Trager [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The PHP getId3() library is at http://getid3.sourceforge.net/. It
might be worth looking into how to expand this library to recognize
the TTF and OTF file headers, perhaps? The idea here seems quite
similar to what the *Nix file command does. If
However I don't want to see any version of that font being sold for
profit
The OFL does allow selling fonts, both the original and a modified
version (otherwise it would not be a free license). For instance, there
are OFL'd fonts in the TeX Live distribution, and we (the TeX Users
In a message dated 11/4/2008 4:07:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
writes:
However I don't want to see any version of that font being sold for
profit or falling under a commercial or proprietary license - or someone
making minor modifications and copyrighting them. That would
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 20:16 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 11/4/2008 4:07:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
writes:
However I don't want to see any version of that font being sold for
profit or falling under a commercial or proprietary license - or
30 matches
Mail list logo
