On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 5:58 PM, Zoltan Herczeg
wrote:
>> We can't really download them from stixfonts.org.
>
> Alex, wouldn't be possible to contact them and ask some help? Maybe they
> could offer us an acceptable solution.
I can try but as a consortium of mostly user organizations, I'm not cer
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
>
> In my opinion, we, the WebKit project as a whole, are not users. It’s the
> people who are making use of WebKit, building it or testing it or possibly
> incorporating it into a product, that are the users. I don’t think the WebKit
> projec
> We can't really download them from stixfonts.org.
Alex, wouldn't be possible to contact them and ask some help? Maybe they
could offer us an acceptable solution.
Zoltan
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/
On Jul 20, 2010, at 8:45 AM, Alex Milowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
>> On Jul 20, 2010, at 8:24 AM, Alex Milowski wrote:
>>
>>> some organization should accept the terms of the license and the
>>> responsibility for distributing this font to test systems (or
Le 20 juil. 2010 à 18:30, Antonio Gomes (:tonikitoo) a écrit :
> Again, maybe something like http://gitorious.org/qtwebkit/testfonts as
> QtWebKit does for the exactly same propose?
But, with that method, fonts should be locally included on all test machines
and as MathML implementation should b
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Antonio Gomes (:tonikitoo)
wrote:
> Again, maybe something like http://gitorious.org/qtwebkit/testfonts as
> QtWebKit does for the exactly same propose?
Maybe I missed this somewhere in the discussion. Sure. That looks like
an option.
Are there the same licensi
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
> On Jul 20, 2010, at 8:24 AM, Alex Milowski wrote:
>
>> some organization should accept the terms of the license and the
>> responsibility for distributing this font to test systems (or developers
>> running tests).
>
> Some organization? You
On Jul 20, 2010, at 8:24 AM, Alex Milowski wrote:
> some organization should accept the terms of the license and the
> responsibility for distributing this font to test systems (or developers
> running tests).
Some organization? You lost me there. Isn’t the STI Pub Companies an
organization?
Again, maybe something like http://gitorious.org/qtwebkit/testfonts as
QtWebKit does for the exactly same propose?
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Alex Milowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
>> On Jul 20, 2010, at 4:39 AM, Alex Milowski wrote:
>>
>>> We can't rea
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
> On Jul 20, 2010, at 4:39 AM, Alex Milowski wrote:
>
>> We can't really download them from stixfonts.org.
>
> Why?
Well, because the zip file is behind a form that requires you to
"accept" the license. It doesn't seem right to try to hack our
On Jul 20, 2010, at 4:39 AM, Alex Milowski wrote:
> We can't really download them from stixfonts.org.
Why?
-- Darin
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
If we want to put the STIX fonts up somewhere to be downloaded, where
would that be if it can't be in subversion?
I think we'd just have a couple of the font files up for download. We
can't really download the from stixfonts.org. Of course, we'd have
to include some "program" for download as wel
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> Apple's legal department would strongly prefer for WebKit's license terms to
> remain simple. We prefer everything to be licensed under LGPL or BSD terms,
> or at the very least a license which is clearly compatible with LGPL and BSD.
Le 19 juil. 2010 à 21:56, Maciej Stachowiak a écrit :
> Good point. However, at least some versions of DumpRenderTree build with test
> fonts embedded directly into the binary.
>>
>
> I'm not suggesting WebFonts. Rather, the fonts could be downloaded on demand
> when running the tests if not
On Jul 19, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Sausset François wrote:
>
> Le 19 juil. 2010 à 21:04, Maciej Stachowiak a écrit :
>
>>
>> Apple's legal department would strongly prefer for WebKit's license terms to
>> remain simple. We prefer everything to be licensed under LGPL or BSD terms,
>> or at the ver
Le 19 juil. 2010 à 21:04, Maciej Stachowiak a écrit :
>
> Apple's legal department would strongly prefer for WebKit's license terms to
> remain simple. We prefer everything to be licensed under LGPL or BSD terms,
> or at the very least a license which is clearly compatible with LGPL and BSD.
Apple's legal department would strongly prefer for WebKit's license terms to
remain simple. We prefer everything to be licensed under LGPL or BSD terms, or
at the very least a license which is clearly compatible with LGPL and BSD. Is
this license LGPL-compatible for cases where the fonts are em
So, it sounds reasonable to use that license for fonts needed in the WebKit
project.
If nobody has objections, an update of the WebKit licensing policy and a review
of the patch [1] including fonts under that license (for MathML) would be great!
François Sausset
[1] https://bugs.webkit.org/sho
A little web searching produced:
It's OSI approved:
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/openfont.html
GNU thinks it's OK, albeit having an "unusual requirement":
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#Fonts
Fedora recommended:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Font_Licenses
It woul
We have a licensing issue we need to address for MathML. We need the STIX
fonts as they will provide consistent rendering for Mathematics. I highly
suspect these fonts will find themselves on our desktops somewhere down
the road. Meanwhile, we need them for our testing infrastructure to
actually
20 matches
Mail list logo
