[Fontconfig-bugs] [Bug 101270] please do not register WOFF(2) fonts

[bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101270

Behdad Esfahbod <freedesktop at behdad.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |freedesktop at behdad.org

--- Comment #9 from Behdad Esfahbod <freedesktop at behdad.org> ---
I'm strongly against this kind of changes.

(In reply to Fabian Greffrath from comment #0)
> Created attachment 131636 [details]
> We don't register WOFF(2) fonts with fontconfig because of the W3C spec
> 
> Forwarded from https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=863835
> 
> Dear fontconfig devs,
> 
> currently, fontconfig registers all fonts installed into the
> /usr/share/fonts

Only if it is configured so.

> directory hierarchy. This may, however, contain fonts
> that are not meant to be exposed to general applications

Then either the fonts should not be there, or fontconfig should be configured
to not look there.

> and are only there to adhere to the FHS specs.

That's complete non-sense.  If they are not for general use, they should not be
in /usr/share/fonts.  I don't care what the exact word of FHS says, but since
it's not legally binding, IMO packages should deviate from it when it makes
sense.  If Debian takes a strict approach to non-sensical requirements of FHS,
it's Debian's problem, not fontconfig's.


> One example are fonts in the WOFF(2) file formats. From the official
> W3C WOFF specs (https://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF/):
> 
> "2. General Requirements
> 
> The primary purpose of the WOFF format is to package fonts linked to
> Web documents by means of CSS @font-face rules. User agents supporting
> the WOFF file format for linked fonts must respect the requirements of
> the CSS3 Fonts specification ([CSS3-Fonts] Section 4.1: The @font-face
> rule). In particular, such linked fonts are only available to the
> documents that reference them; they MUST NOT be made available to
> other applications or documents on the user's system.
> 
> NOTE: the WOFF format is intended for use with @font-face to provide
> fonts linked to specific Web documents. Therefore, WOFF files must not
> be treated as an installable font format in desktop operating systems
> or similar environments. The WOFF-packaged data will typically be
> decoded to sfnt format for use by existing font-rendering APIs that
> expect OpenType font data, but such decoded font must not be exposed
> to other documents or applications."

We are not legally bound by the WOFF specification either.  WOFF was written
that way to appease to font foundries to convince them to release their fonts
on the web.  It's stupid to think that such enforcement reduces font piracy.


> So, please refrain from registering fonts in WOFF(2) formats with
> fontconfig. This can be achieved by installing the attached fontconfig
> snippet, courtesy of Nicolas Spalinger <nicolas_spalinger at sil.org>,
> as /etc/fonts/conf.d/70-no-woffs.conf .
> 
> I'd prefer to reject these fonts based on the fontformat information,
> but fontconfig reports them to be in "TrueType" format on the systems
> that I currently have access to. Alternatively, the globbing could be
> changed to apply to the file name extension, if fontconfig supports that
> (the user docs state that "globs only apply to directories, not to
> individual fonts" although it provides "*.pcf.gz" among the examples).

I'm fine if we add a FC_CONTAINER element that exposes (and filters) based on
container type.  But I'm not going to do the work.

All said, I'm not fontconfig maintainer.  I just added my personal take on
this.

Cheers

> Thanks!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>  - Fabian

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig-bugs/attachments/20170621/463829c2/attachment-0001.html>