On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Elle Stone
<ellest...@ninedegreesbelow.com> wrote:
>> If someone is going to purposefully block content (whatever the reason),
>> then they should expect things to not look as designed (but should still
>> be functional).  I think we're covering that.
>>     Nice fonts are nice to see. But downloading fonts and such from
>> another
>>     location to the user's computer does add to the weight and download
>>     speed of a page, and as "objects" they are going to be perceived as
>> "not
>>     good" by security-conscious people.
>> Correct!  See above.  (If you are blocking stuff on purpose, don't be
>> surprised when it doesn't show up as intended).
>> Most importantly, the
>> site works without those fonts (though it maybe ugly).
> You are asking people to trust that the GIMP website hasn't been and never
> will be compromised and therefore it's OK to trust whatever "stuff" that
> might be downloaded.

Derailer here - asking for a webfont to be loaded is no less or more
secure than asking for an image to be loaded.  In other words, simply
loading any web page is probably going to require loading external
resources to render properly - requesting a web font doesn't install
it in your system directory or anything.  It's just a one-time deal on
page load, just like an image.

Performance is an issue though. I'm a bit appalled that 4 or 5 seconds
for "above the fold" seems to be OK.  But I'm a late intro to this
discussion, so maybe I'm off base.

gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:    gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Reply via email to