On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IANAL: A patent suit seems unclear because of the W3C's patent policy.
What patent policy was in place when @font-face was specified in 1998? How would it affect patents that were filed or acquired in the interim, given that @font-face was dropped in CSS 2.1 and hasn't seen CR since? I'm not a lawyer either, but "unclear" doesn't sound like an interesting defense. If by "I would pay to have this implemented" you mean "I would provide indemnification", then that could be more interesting, but not really a topic for this forum. I don't believe that patent issues are the only barrier to interoperable implementation, but I'm not quite as confident as you seem to be that there are no such issues possible. A public and comprehensive test suite would be a big step forward, though it's possible that WebKit has one as part of their implementation. Then we'd be able to tell better exactly what an implementation is required to do to interoperate, and we'd likely have a better sense of what claims would be "essential" for purposes of implementing something interoperable -- which something might be a significant superset of what's actually specified in CSS2. Mike _______________________________________________ dev-tech-layout mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-layout
