[Openfontlibrary] Hi from argentina

minombresbond minombresbond at datafull.com
Sat Jan 19 16:05:41 PST 2008

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:20:25 +0100
"Dave Crossland" <dave at lab6.com> wrote:

> On 19/01/2008, Nicolas Spalinger <nicolas_spalinger at sil.org> wrote:
> >
> > Looking forward to your articles on free software and typography :)
> > Let us know where and when you publish them.
> Yes :-)
> > As for an official position of openfontlibrary, I guess we should set
> > this community voting system up someday...
> For sure; and a planet for collating our blogs... :-)
> > I'll let the others answer and simply point out that the current hosting
> > platform supports tagging your fonts as released under the OFL and that
> > there are currently about 20 fonts released under the OFL published on
> > the OFLB (openfontlibrary):
> > http://openfontlibrary.org/media/tags/OFL
> Yes, the Open Font Library will eventually (I hope) publish fonts
> under any and all free software licenses, and then recommend a couple
> for various common scenarios.
> The "Expat" license is great for "do anything you like, I don't care
> at all" people - similar to the X11, Python and revised BSD licenses.
> The OFL is a great license for "design" focused people who want to
> contribute to free software in a simple way and ensure their artistic
> integrity is protected.
> The GPLv3 with the font exception is a good license for "software
> freedom" people who want to ensure that the font sources are available
> for all versions. However, there isn't good FAQ style explanations for
> the intricacies of this approach yet.

the discussion about the font sources and the gpl is very interesting,
i would think the concept of typography sources (or any artistic work) in a more comprehensive way that software sources, and continued availability of sources is very good idea for me too

I think the fact that a OFL license is specially developed for typography is a really good thing.
I mean that font designers I know will be happy if I say that the license is special for fonts, not software (they do not want to be considered as developers of a particular type of software..)

i visited the unifont site, http://unifont.org/go_for_ofl/, and it seems that there is a consensus behind the OFL license
in the OpenFontLIbrary wiki mentions the open font licence in many places, but i dont know if a generic reference to any 'open font licence', or refers to SIL-OFL

that is the reason for my question (and it is an excuse to intervene in the list!)

> -- 
> Regards,
> Dave
> _______________________________________________
> Openfontlibrary mailing list
> Openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary

More information about the Openfontlibrary mailing list