David E. Ross wrote: > > Then, there is the fact that W3C's CSS Working Group has not yet > resolved certain issues relating to its Web Fonts specification. For > example, there seems to be a dispute as to whether all font files will > be allowed or only .eot files. With limited resources, the Mozilla > organizations need to be careful about putting effort into implementing > something that will then have to be revised.
Font formats were indeed discussed in the CSSWG (and I can't say why atm), but what format is used for fonts is out-of-scope for CSS. CSS is external-resource-format-agnostic. It doesn't require PNG or JPEG or GIF for images, and it doesn't require EOT or TTF or anything else for fonts. Format requirements are decided by the industry. E.g. printers have embraced JPEG but not GIF and are working towards adding PNG to the "reliably supported" list; web browsers all support GIF, JPEG, and PNG, and are working towards adding SVG to the "reliably supported" list. Font formats will likely be the same situation, with TTF and EOT being the main contenders here. ~fantasai _______________________________________________ dev-tech-layout mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-layout
