Re: [Openfontlibrary] FontEmbedding.com
That would be great! On Sun, 2008-08-10 at 17:04 +0100, Dave Crossland wrote: 2008/8/10 Jon Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]: And so we have it :) Then I'll keep this to my self...post away Gustavo! Sadly he told me offlist he unsubscribed this afternoon. If he starts blogging, I will ask if he would allow us to set planet.openfontlibrary.org (currently testing at www.planet.open-fonts.org :-) to consume it. Cheers, Dave -- Jon Phillips San Francisco, CA + Guangzhou + Beijing GLOBAL +1.415.830.3884 CHINA +86.1.360.282.8624 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rejon.org IM/skype: kidproto Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
Re: [Openfontlibrary] FontEmbedding.com
my point is: i don't want to discuss, i want to work on fonts. *that* is my job. sorry for misspelling your name. On Aug 9, 2008, at 11:56 AM, Jon Phillips wrote: Gustavo, I'm not telling you want to do, but offering helpful suggestions that would help us construct a better project. This list is to develop the openfontlibrary.org and your posts, while informative, do not help us fix bugs or move the openfontlibrary.org towards supporting even the basic features we would like. more below. On Sat, 2008-08-09 at 11:46 -0300, Gustavo Ferreira wrote: dear john, please don't tell me what to do. thanks. i don't care about the open font library (and i have already explained why). Ok, then please don't post here on this list. blog it. i am a type-designer, i care about fonts (open or not) and their typographic quality. great. in my humble oppinion, you would be of much more help to the free/ open font cause if you would direct your energy at raising funds to pay professional type-designers to work on free/open fonts. (but i've said that already too...) This list is openfontlibrary.org which is list to construct/develop openfontlibrary first. So, I've put my energy, when available to do this. While great to pay designers, that is not highest priority to get openfontlibrary.org working well - coding is! We need people to help build the site, not just link dump on this development list. regards, - gustavo. ps: what are font 2.0 sites? Made that up. Meaning, font sites that use web 2.0 tech. There are lots like you often url dump onto this list. If you would like to discuss this further, lets take offlist. Jon On Aug 9, 2008, at 2:34 AM, Jon Phillips wrote: Gustavo, one way you could help is by putting a listing of these awesome new font 2.0 sites up on the OFLB wiki...then we can track things that are free and/or open and what features OFLB needs. Jon On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 21:58 -0300, Gustavo Ferreira wrote: http://www.fontembedding.com/ curious to hear your thoughts about this... :-) regards, - gustavo. ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary -- Jon Phillips San Francisco, CA + Guangzhou + Beijing GLOBAL +1.415.830.3884 CHINA +86.1.360.282.8624 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rejon.org IM/skype: kidproto Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
Re: [Openfontlibrary] FontEmbedding.com
Gustavo, one way you could help is by putting a listing of these awesome new font 2.0 sites up on the OFLB wiki...then we can track things that are free and/or open and what features OFLB needs. Jon On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 21:58 -0300, Gustavo Ferreira wrote: http://www.fontembedding.com/ curious to hear your thoughts about this... :-) regards, - gustavo. ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary -- Jon Phillips San Francisco, CA + Guangzhou + Beijing GLOBAL +1.415.830.3884 CHINA +86.1.360.282.8624 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rejon.org IM/skype: kidproto Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
Re: [Openfontlibrary] FontEmbedding.com
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 10:11 +0100, Dave Crossland wrote: 2008/7/25 Liam R E Quin [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [...] I apologies for being hasty with that email, and retract the statement that Bitstream isn't involved in W3C at all. Sorry. OK What I meant way, Bitstream are not involved in the W3C CSS Working Group, where it seems EOT is being considered. Although that's true, EOT is not currently being worked on by any W3C Working Group as far as I know. [...] how XSL would involve EOT, I have no idea :- By linking to an EOT font, or including one, in an XSL-FO instance. You could think of an XSL-FO instance as a sort of XML-based page description language, except that the final formatting, pagination and line-breaking hasn't been done yet. Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
Re: [Openfontlibrary] FontEmbedding.com
Dave Crossland wrote: 2008/7/23 Christopher Fynn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: These are the same people that released the report trashing free fonts They were shit-talking proprietary software redistributable at zero price - freeware - and all the problems they identify would be solvable if those fonts were not proprietary Agreed. They say that EOT will be a W3C specification. Microsoft's Embedded OpenType (.EOT) Font Format Submission Request to W3C: http://www.w3.org/Submission/2008/01/ Microsoft can submit whatever they want to the W3C, that doesn't mean it WILL become a specification. Adobe are supporting this as well - and from what I've heard it has fairly widespread support. Bitstream hold plenty of software patents on all this stuff, and they aren't involved in the W3C, so anyone who wants to implement anything like EOT is going to be screwed by them. The main Bitstream Patents related to this seems to be 5,577,177 Apparatus and methods for creating and using portable fonts which goes back to 1995 - I'm wondering how restrictive or enforceable this is? So far they don't seem to have taken any successful action to stop EOT Microsoft's WEFT which has already been around for ten years. Why woud that change now? Meanwhile Bitstream seem have stopped pushing their PFR for web font embedding (which anyway did not work complex scripts) - and seem to be concentrating on it's use in Digital Video and embedded devices. Bitstream's Own TrueDoc / PFR blurb http://www.bitstream.com/font_rendering/products/truedoc/faqs.html claims TrueDoc works differently from font embedding which sounds like they are trying to claim what they do is *different* from EOT etc. They also claim: When recording characters, the TrueDoc recorder does not access the original font directly. In addition, TrueDoc does not copy or use any hinting information from the original font. TrueDoc's internal, automatic hinting process handles all hinting to guarantee exceptional quality on all devices. - and seem to imply that this gets round the original font license. Of course Microsoft, Monotype, Adobe also have number of patents of their own related to font embedding . - chris ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
Re: [Openfontlibrary] FontEmbedding.com
2008/7/24 Christopher Fynn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dave Crossland wrote: They say that EOT will be a W3C specification. http://www.w3.org/Submission/2008/01/ Microsoft can submit whatever they want to the W3C, that doesn't mean it WILL become a specification. Adobe are supporting this as well - and from what I've heard it has fairly widespread support. Depends who you ask, and what you mean by 'support.' Tom Phinney's informal poll asked mainly proprietary-minded type designers and web designers, and he dismissed the disproportionally small but vocal critics. And although Adobe and Microsoft are pushing this behind the scenes, there has been no favorable commentary on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list. Web developers understand why DRM is a plague on all our houses, at least. And the comments in the blog at FontEmbedding.com is also full of unfavorable remarks. I'm wondering how restrictive or enforceable this is? IANAL, and I'm not in a country with this stuff. But I've heard Bitstream people voice an expectation for their pound of flesh. So far they don't seem to have taken any successful action to stop EOT Microsoft's WEFT which has already been around for ten years Microsoft and Bitstream almost certainly have a blanket patent cross licensing deal. The only other developer to use the ideas monopolised by their patents was Netscape, who also licensed the patent - and Bitstream's implementation too, in fact. Meanwhile Bitstream seem have stopped pushing their PFR for web font embedding (which anyway did not work complex scripts) - and seem to be concentrating on it's use in Digital Video and embedded devices. Since web-browsers are a core part of Digital Video and embedded devices, this is foreboding. seem to imply that this gets round the original font license. All that is historic IMO: The proprietary beasts are so archaic, when Bitstream was doing this 15 years ago they didn't want it done at all, and Bitstream had to work around them. Of course Microsoft, Monotype, Adobe also have number of patents of their own related to font embedding . These are covered by the W3C's patent release, which is friendly to free software. Cheers, Dave ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
Re: [Openfontlibrary] FontEmbedding.com
On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 00:35 +0100, Dave Crossland wrote: [...] Bitstream hold plenty of software patents on all this stuff, and they aren't involved in the W3C, so anyone who wants to implement anything like EOT is going to be screwed by them. Bitstream (as I've mentioned to you before) is an active W3C Member. Please don't spread unsubstantiated rumours. Thanks, Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
Re: [Openfontlibrary] FontEmbedding.com
http://www.fontembedding.com/ = Ascender. These are the same people that released the report trashing free fonts http://www.ascendercorp.com/webfontstudy.html Dave Crossland wrote: 2008/7/21 Gustavo Ferreira [EMAIL PROTECTED]: http://www.fontembedding.com/ curious to hear your thoughts about this... :-) They say that EOT will be a W3C specification. Microsoft's Embedded OpenType (.EOT) Font Format Submission Request to W3C: http://www.w3.org/Submission/2008/01/ MS Embedded OpenType (EOT) File Format: http://www.w3.org/Submission/EOT/ Monotype MicroType Express (MTX) Font Format: http://www.w3.org/Submission/MTX/ - Chris This seems delusional to me. ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
[Openfontlibrary] FontEmbedding.com
http://www.fontembedding.com/ curious to hear your thoughts about this... :-) regards, - gustavo. ___ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
