Reopening: Q: webfonts:
nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
Wed Nov 27 21:08:55 UTC 2013
Le Mer 27 novembre 2013 15:39, Petr Vobornik a écrit :
> I would like to reopen the discussion about packaging web fonts since
> its conclusion(below) is not very usable.
> The issue I'm dealing with is that we want FreeIPA Web UI to use Open
> Sans and Font Awesome(FA) font. FA is being packaged and I planned to
> package Open Sans (Apache license v2). But TTF versions of both fonts
> will fail in IE.
> OTF/TTF fails in all modern versions of IE when the font does not have
> embedding permissions set to 'installable' . It's more common that
> one would say.
Of course it is very common, it's the default setting in most font
authoring tools, and the authors of those tools were very much against web
fonts in the first place. So font authors that actually want to do web
fonts and actually choose free font licenses get betrayed by their
tooling. And a lot of them do not care for ie at all anyway.
Just write a fontforge or ttx script that flips this bit at rpm build
time, assuming you've done your legal review correctly the bit is in
contradiction with the font license (if the font was no installable we
could not package it in the first place). You'll be doing nothing more
than fixing a bug in upstream's font implementation.
> This behavior is considered as a feature (probably won't
> be changed anytime soon).
MS started saying they would never support anything but eot
Then they admitted they could do woff but really, never TTF/OTF
Then they had to implement TTF/OTF anyway, but added this silly restriction.
Is that their last word? Who actually believes that? They're still losing
More information about the devel