discussion:
http://scripts.sil.org/OFL_web_fonts_and_RFNs
Thanks again for your help in maintaining the OFL model,
Victor Gaultney
Hello Open Font Library people -
I'm looking for some help from any of you who have been involved in
collaborative font projects. The programme for October's ATypI conference in
Amsterdam has been published, and I'm giving a talk on 'Open and collaborative
font design in a web fonts world':
Nicolas -
When I pushed for Fedora to officially endorse the OFL, it was very clear
in my mind that embedding was still a distribution of the font bits, and
that the OFL embedding clause merely stated there was a requirement
boundary between the embedded font and the rest of the document.
On 7 Jun 2013, at 13:10, Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote:
If you allow intent here, the OFL clauses have no force anymore. At least
that's how I understand the legalities.
Intent is a factor, but not the only one. If the fonts can reasonably and
practically be extracted for
On 7 Jun 2013, at 19:48, Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote:
The only sane separation is font bits (embedded,
modified, converted, bundled, rot13ed, or not) and the rest. Font is
whatever derivative part of the original work can be used to render a
single glyph, regardless of
On 5 Jun 2013, at 16:51, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
And the OFL definition of 'embedding' is … ?
From the FAQ:
Question: 1.11 What do you mean by 'embedding'? How does that differ from other
means of distribution?
Answer: By 'embedding' we mean inclusion of the font in a
On 5 Jun 2013, at 17:59, vernon adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
from the OFL definition, the uses of OFL fonts by Adobe, Monotype, etc IS
'embedding'...
Uh - not at all. …we mean inclusion of the font in a document or file… The
web fonts paper, again, talks all about this. :-)
And
On 3 Jun 2013, at 20:36, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
I have now contacted font pro.com about this. They promise to remedy the
situation.
Great. This is exactly how the process should work. The community polices
itself. If anyone comes across a service that seems to violate
On 3 Jun 2013, at 23:47, Khaled Hosny khaledho...@eglug.org wrote:
You can embed a webfont as base64 encoded string inside the HTML file.
Good point, Khaled. That does sound like traditional embedding. The key
differences from standard web fonts use are that:
- The font is delivered as part
On 29 May 2013, at 19:07, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
The ofl has no upgrade model, the authors have no resources to make an
update, and believe the license provides for this situation.
I agree that the OFL 1.1 serves us well for now. Because of the huge
undertaking it would be to
Perhaps the authors of the OFL could create such a text?
I think Victor has been quite clear that he's not at all interested in
diluting the OFL model like this,
Yes - for the reasons Dave mentions, and the basic conceptual difficulty of
defining and evaluating what changes would be
On 24 May 2013, at 13:31, Pablo Impallari impall...@gmail.com wrote:
Wishful thinking: I'm also hoping/expecting that Adobe or MT will be generous
too. In the same way as the small design agencies or the individual users who
donate everyday.
But keep in mind that you released your font
On 23 May 2013, at 10:56, Pablo Impallari impall...@gmail.com wrote:
You know, we have the situation at present where at least one major corp is
using my fonts in their services
They are modifying and using the RFN without agreement from me.
I have the same concerns as Vernon.
I'm
this helps to bring clarity to some of the many difficult issues
related to web fonts and Reserved Font Names.
Thanks,
Victor Gaultney
On 18 Sep 2012, at 02:38, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
Does anyone have any resources to recommend on font family naming
conventions? :-)
Adam T's thorough recommendations are here:
http://forum.fontlab.com/index.php?topic=313.0
However careful and complex these may be, I've found the
Hi everyone -
I received the following notice that related to the OFLib. I don't think it's
spam, as there's nothing about the SIL-specific account that received it that
has anything to do with the OFLib. One of you may want to follow up with them.
Victor
Victor Gaultney | vt
efforts. I hope they like my idea. :-)
Victor
(OFLB lurker)
Victor Gaultney | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Openfontlibrary mailing list
Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
Mark -
On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 05:32 -0700, Mark Williamson wrote:
Mr Gaultney's allegation that he recognizes many font styles is
irrelevant. Styles of font cannot be copyrighted. Indeed, there are
often many different individual font _faces_ by many different authors
which share _styles_
18 matches
Mail list logo
