Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-11-04 Thread Nicholas Shanks
Hi list. I recently emailed a few indie font developers to get their opinions on EOT and @font-face. Here's the first response worth reading on the matter. Ray has given permission for his comments to be distributed to any interested browser developers. — Nicholas Shanks. Begin

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-22 Thread Balaji
. www.dinakaran.com 2. www.dailythanthi.com _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Storey Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 5:46 PM To: Maciej Stachowiak Cc: WebKit Development Subject: Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit On 18 Oct 2008, at 03:33, Maciej

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-21 Thread Nicholas Shanks
On 18 Oct 2008, at 3:33 am, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: Some of the proposals there sound really interesting. 1) Detect when known unusually-encoded EOT fonts are used, and convert text in that font on-the-fly to Unicode. This has the advantage that features like find in page and copy/paste

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-21 Thread David Storey
On 18 Oct 2008, at 03:33, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: On Oct 17, 2008, at 3:02 PM, David Hyatt wrote: On Oct 17, 2008, at 4:58 PM, Peter Kasting wrote: On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:52 PM, David Hyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's important to recognize that if you flip the EOT switch, you're

[webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread David Hyatt
I would like to talk about EOT support in WebKit. http://www.w3.org/Submission/EOT/ EOT is an alternate file format for delivery of fonts using the @font- face directive. It is supported by Internet Explorer on Windows. Microsoft has been trying to push it as a standard instead of allowing

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread Peter Kasting
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 1:35 AM, David Hyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe this to be one of those rare cases. Before making this decision, however, I would like to hear from representatives for the other WebKit ports. In the absence of any strong vendor support, I do not believe we

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread David Hyatt
On Oct 17, 2008, at 10:35 AM, Peter Kasting wrote: I'm not convinced that supporting EOT in the no-DRM way Hixie proposes is harmful, although I wish it weren't needed. My problem with this idea is that it's one thing to support a DRM-free open format. It's another thing entirely to

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread David Hyatt
On Oct 17, 2008, at 2:22 PM, Amanda Walker wrote: On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 12:41 PM, David Hyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The big problem is if you support it, EOT wins. We may as well remove the TTF code path from the tree. EOT is unwieldy to use, doesn't support the full range of TTF,

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread Peter Kasting
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:52 PM, David Hyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's important to recognize that if you flip the EOT switch, you're going to end up using EOT over TTF in many cases. In fact if IE *does* in end up skipping TTF files properly, the font you get in Chrome would actually

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread David Hyatt
On Oct 17, 2008, at 4:58 PM, Peter Kasting wrote: On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:52 PM, David Hyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's important to recognize that if you flip the EOT switch, you're going to end up using EOT over TTF in many cases. In fact if IE *does* in end up skipping TTF files

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread David Hyatt
On Oct 17, 2008, at 5:03 PM, Amanda Walker wrote: On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 5:52 PM, David Hyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 17, 2008, at 2:22 PM, Amanda Walker wrote: EOT is irrelevant to the technical and operational advantages of TTF. That's simply not true. In order to avoid using

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread Nicholas Shanks
On 18 Oct 2008, at 12:11 am, David Hyatt wrote: EOT would be served by the Web site in order to be IE-compatible. If EOT is listed first and you support it, then you have to use it. You can't prefer TTF if it's #2 in the list, since that violates the @font- face specification, which states

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Oct 17, 2008, at 12:22 PM, Amanda Walker wrote: On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 12:41 PM, David Hyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The big problem is if you support it, EOT wins. We may as well remove the TTF code path from the tree. EOT is unwieldy to use, doesn't support the full range of TTF,

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Oct 17, 2008, at 3:02 PM, David Hyatt wrote: On Oct 17, 2008, at 4:58 PM, Peter Kasting wrote: On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:52 PM, David Hyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's important to recognize that if you flip the EOT switch, you're going to end up using EOT over TTF in many cases. In

Re: [webkit-dev] EOT Support in WebKit

2008-10-17 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Oct 17, 2008, at 6:43 PM, Amanda Walker wrote: Agreed--and I'll repeat that I don't like eot; I was just surprised by Dave's reaction (which I now have more insight into :-)) I think Dave may have stated things a bit hyperbolically. But I think it is true that EOT support in other