On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:20:25 +0100 "Dave Crossland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 19/01/2008, Nicolas Spalinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Looking forward to your articles on free software and typography :) > > Let us know where and when you publish them. > > Yes :-) > > > As for an official position of openfontlibrary, I guess we should set > > this community voting system up someday... > > For sure; and a planet for collating our blogs... :-) > > > I'll let the others answer and simply point out that the current hosting > > platform supports tagging your fonts as released under the OFL and that > > there are currently about 20 fonts released under the OFL published on > > the OFLB (openfontlibrary): > > http://openfontlibrary.org/media/tags/OFL > > Yes, the Open Font Library will eventually (I hope) publish fonts > under any and all free software licenses, and then recommend a couple > for various common scenarios. > > The "Expat" license is great for "do anything you like, I don't care > at all" people - similar to the X11, Python and revised BSD licenses. > > The OFL is a great license for "design" focused people who want to > contribute to free software in a simple way and ensure their artistic > integrity is protected. > > The GPLv3 with the font exception is a good license for "software > freedom" people who want to ensure that the font sources are available > for all versions. However, there isn't good FAQ style explanations for > the intricacies of this approach yet. the discussion about the font sources and the gpl is very interesting, i would think the concept of typography sources (or any artistic work) in a more comprehensive way that software sources, and continued availability of sources is very good idea for me too I think the fact that a OFL license is specially developed for typography is a really good thing. I mean that font designers I know will be happy if I say that the license is special for fonts, not software (they do not want to be considered as developers of a particular type of software..) i visited the unifont site, http://unifont.org/go_for_ofl/, and it seems that there is a consensus behind the OFL license in the OpenFontLIbrary wiki mentions the open font licence in many places, but i dont know if a generic reference to any 'open font licence', or refers to SIL-OFL that is the reason for my question (and it is an excuse to intervene in the list!) thanks! > -- > Regards, > Dave > _______________________________________________ > Openfontlibrary mailing list > Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary > _______________________________________________ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
