Typophile - W3C takes a fresh look at linking fonts to Web pages - Comments

@tomdonahue: That’s the

Magnum — Sun, 4 Jun 2006 03:23:37 -0700

@tomdonahue: That’s the beauty of css (in Opera at least). Define your own, overriding font set that makes shure all text is readable by you.

@everybody else: I fully support the view of dberlow here. The notion that the w3c take a step towards implementing fonts beyond the ones provided by the different OS’es is a good one. For the user, the minor OS, the web designer, and done right - the font designer. What you don’t want to do here is copy the movie/music industries and get the public against you. Rather - this is a major opportunity to show where those went wrong. Donationware is an opportunity here, given that the fonts in use are bundled with contact info and a polite way of telling the ’pirate’ you appreciate his liking of your work, and very much would be honored if mentioned person would contribute according to his own economical ability and use of your work.

Your market is not with the common man, and never will be. But there’s a small chance you can get the common man to appreciate and notice your work. Even make some small money of him. But, come on! Thinking DRM in conjunction with fonts is something you simply cannot afford to do. Should web designers do the same with their code? It’s the same thing.

> some are poorly designed.

tomdonahue — Tue, 9 May 2006 07:01:08 -0700

> some are poorly designed. However, there are
> also good-looking, freely usable fonts out there

As a user with rather poor eyesight that isn’t getting any better, I hope that if this does go through they also provide a way to turn it off, like you can do with images.
Not that I wouldn’t love to see more variety, but I really need a readable text font and if it just isn’t working I’d like to be able to fall back to my default fonts, without having to turn CSS off completely.

David, could you explain

dberlow — Tue, 9 May 2006 06:50:31 -0700

David, could you explain how this proposal would affect people’s e-mailing of fonts to one another?

Nothing here or anywhere changes people’s ability to email fonts to each other, ever. The point is, that the IP of digital outline fonts is not protectable, only enforceable. And, something changes dramatically for the better in the enforceability when the URL of a font enters the code stream of the web. So, I drool.

Only those of “significance” and “size” may voice opinion,
I did not say anything of opinions not to voice. I said, it’d be a shame if those, who’s work is unprotected from digital transportation except by hiding or not making to begin with, who don’t have any stake in the opening of a real market, and others, who seem intent on market reduction, were able to bamboozle the public out of its natural right to see things differently.

Ascender Corp has just released the results[...]
I know, One site, 5,000 fonts, no winners. Ascender, to whom I’m grateful for this study, has proven what most of us here, have known for a long time — Fonts that are good for the web, take work in the TrueType hinting tables, Code Pages, Name tables, Embedding restrictions and etc.

But what is the point? Let me see, what is the best way, to make sure, there a more well designed and engineered fonts available for users to specify in the composition of web pages, not fewer... :)
a. Keep it complicated by not having a free and universal OS/Browser/FontTech solution?
b. Make it complicated some new and novel way?
c. Make it simple, make it universal, make the parts you need to police it if you want to.

Make a market, more good fonts. Choke a market, same old good fonts, nothing special ever.

“…if a small number of

dezcom — Mon, 8 May 2006 06:59:56 -0700

”...if a small number of “companies” with small and insignificant libraries, or an even smaller number of companies with small and significant libraries can’t get past their own impotent protection fantasies...”

I see once again, “size matters”. Only those of “significance” and “size” may voice opinion, all others just head for the Viagra of rights or limply surender since there is no rod or staff to protect them.

ChrisL

Ascender Corp has just

sii — Mon, 8 May 2006 06:46:44 -0700

Ascender Corp has just released the results of their analysis of free fonts on the Web to counter some of the claims made by the W3C...

——-Original Message——-
From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Håkon Wium Lie
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 11:12 AM
To: Dave Raggett
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: Downloadable fonts and image replacement

Also sprach Dave Raggett:

> I am therefore looking for support for direct use of TTF files so
> that I don’t have to use a special tool for embedded fonts like Weft
> [1]. There are plenty of fonts with open licenses that are perfectly
> good for most purposes, so a DRM-based solution isn’t high on my
> wish list.

This is also my experience. There are thousands of TrueType font
families out there. Some examples:

http://www.fontfreak.com/fonts-g2.htm
http://www.1001freefonts.com/fonts/pfonts5.htm

Typically, four truetype files are zipped up into a file which —
roughly speaking — has a size similar to a photograph. Some of the
fonts have legal restrictions that prevent their use, some only cover
the English alphabet, and some are poorly designed. However, there are
also good-looking, freely usable fonts out there. These fonts
represent an untapped resource for typography on the web.

- - - - - - - - -

Some more info here -

http://www.ascendercorp.com/webfontstudy.html

> This proposal changes

William Berkson — Mon, 8 May 2006 04:49:04 -0700

> This proposal changes that.

David, could you explain how this proposal would affect people’s e-mailing of fonts to one another?

You don’t see? Hmmm.

dberlow — Mon, 8 May 2006 04:32:26 -0700

You don’t see? Hmmm. Anyone in the world can email a font to anyone in the world and there is nothing any of us can do about it, and we will never be able to do anything about it. Anyone in the world can email a font to any million people in the world and there is nothing any of us can do about. (after the email, the font can be rendered into any size required, and go onto the web with no reward or possibility thereof for the author, ever). This proposal changes that. But, if a small number of “companies” with small and insignificant libraries, or an even smaller number of companies with small and significant libraries can’t get past their own impotent protection fantasies, leaving the world’s ability to express itself, muted, then what is gained for the “type community”? What? I’m getting the names of 10-20 significant foundriesgathered to counterblance the current knee-jerk short-sightedness. Anyone willing to risk that we know what we’re talking about, please contact me directly so we can consistently express our views to the proper forum.

Thank you!

Thomas, I am glad you would

dezcom — Sat, 6 May 2006 17:47:19 -0700

Thomas,
I am glad you would be willing to let your own views be known. I think it is important that we hear all points of view, personal as well as corporate.
I don’t know how we would go about getting this on the Typecon agenda but I would be willing to help do whatever is needed.

ChrisL

Getting back to an earlier

Thomas Phinney — Sat, 6 May 2006 15:45:28 -0700

Getting back to an earlier comment, I for one would be happy to be on a panel, either at TypeCon or some other conference, to discuss this. I’ve certainly given it a lot of thought over the years.

I should caution that I’m not an Adobe spokesperson on this issue - there are a lot of different teams at Adobe with a stake in this discussion.

Tim, I echo Si’s comment.

dezcom — Sat, 6 May 2006 08:45:40 -0700

Tim, I echo Si’s comment. You have summed up my feeling on the matter as well. I was getting frustrated thinking that I was the only one who saw it that way. Thanks for kindling hope! I just wish that there were something more approaching an outcry by the type community rather than a so what ambivalence.

ChrisL

“Which puts the onus on

dberlow — Sat, 6 May 2006 05:03:54 -0700

“Which puts the onus on the type business to react, or be robbed.”

Robbed? Wako.

Which puts the onus on the

Tim Brown — Tue, 2 May 2006 09:08:11 -0700

Which puts the onus on the type business to react, or be robbed.

Tim, I think you’ve summed

sii — Tue, 2 May 2006 09:01:22 -0700

Tim, I think you’ve summed up the situation precisely.

Although they’re not saying technology discussions are off the table, in effect anything that’s DRMy, proprietary or not simple is going to be knocked down.

tim, your last sentence has

thierry blancpain — Tue, 2 May 2006 08:57:10 -0700

tim, your last sentence has to be true for a real success.

the last CD i bought had DRM and didnt work on my mp3-diskman, so in the end i had to download the album and burn it again. as said, i havent bought a CD since. what does that tell us? do NOT repeat the same mistakes the movie/music-industry did years ago (and still do).

If the technology weren’t

Tim Brown — Tue, 2 May 2006 08:43:34 -0700

If the technology weren’t up for suggestion ... if the W3C decided that full font files (no DRM) would be sent with web pages, like images are now, then installed and summoned by CSS....

Then how would the type business get people to pay for type they could otherwise steal?

What if it were easier to buy a font than to steal one or download a free one?

W3C takes a fresh look at linking fonts to Web pages

sii — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:12:02 -0700

Crossposted...

As recently mentioned on Tom Phinney’s blog...

http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2006/03/fonts_on_the_we.html

...the W3C has once again turned its attention to the issue of fonts and Web content.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Apr/0070.html

A couple of people are already suggesting that the W3C CSS 3 specs allow TTF’s to be linked to Web pages in exactly the same was as images are now linked.

Discussion - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Apr/

The W3C would love to hear from those making fonts for a living, or even for fun. It would be a shame for them to make a decision on this without those involved in type design voicing their support, opinions or concerns.

Cheers, Si