[OpenFontLibrary] [GFD] Treatment of the OFL in the wild

[Vernon Adams]

Are we saying that embedding a font that a user can extract, is a perfectly acceptable (i.e. FLOSS-like) way of distributing a libre font?
I like the idea of that, but i'm trying to think of what weaknesses in that method, and what could be ways to enable embedding as a means of distribution whilst also protecting the freedom of the font?

-vern




On 4 Jun 2013, at 08:05, Dave Crossland <dave at lab6.com> wrote:

> Extracting the fonts is just as easy
> 
> On Jun 4, 2013 4:59 AM, "Victor Gaultney" <vtype at gaultney.org> wrote:
> On 3 Jun 2013, at 23:47, Khaled Hosny <khaledhosny at eglug.org> wrote:
> 
>> You can embed a webfont as base64 encoded string inside the HTML file.
> 
> Good point, Khaled. That does sound like traditional embedding. The key differences from standard web fonts use are that:
> 
> - The font is delivered as part of the HTML file, not a separate resource
> - The font is provided by the same server as the rest of the doc
> - The font is used for only one document
> - The font is always present, even if the doc is viewed offline
> 
> I'm not sure whether an embedded web font would be any more difficult to extract than normal web fonts. Anyone have thoughts on this?
> 
> These differences are significant. Nicolas has been out of the office for a couple of weeks. When he gets back in the office I'll talk with him about adjusting the FAQ and web fonts paper to address fonts delivered within the HTML file.
> 
>> Even the common case of just linking to the file is not much different
>> from bundling the font in the zip container of ODT or DOCX.
> 
> I think it is. In a zip the fonts travel with the doc and they cannot be used by other docs unless you extract them.
> 
> V