On Jun 23, 2009, at 8:47 PM, Darin Fisher wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Ojan Vafai <o...@chromium.org> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:45 PM, David Hyatt <hy...@apple.com> wrote:
On Jun 22, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
Mozilla restricts downloaded fonts to same-origin by default, with
the ability for the hosting site to open up access via Access-
Control (aka CORS). Apparently this step has the potential to make
font foundries more comfortable about using straight up OpenType
fonts on the Web, without introducing DRM. Should we follow
Mozilla's lead on this?
I see no reason to do this.
I also see harm from doing this. There are many sites (e.g. Google
Docs) that serve static content of a different, cookie-less domain
for performance reasons. They would be unable to do this for Web
Fonts with this restriction.
This is an increasingly common practice as tools like http://code.google.com/speed/page-speed/
become more ubiquitous.
Ojan
Wouldn't Access-Control still support serving the Web Fonts off of a
secondary domain?
The main effect would be to change the default behavior. Hotlinking
would be disabled unless the server opts in via Access-Control. The
Mozilla folks haven't made a hugely compelling case for this
restriction though.
- Maciej
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
