New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.
Starred by 37 users

Issue metadata

Status: Fixed
Owner:
Closed: Apr 2010
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: All
Pri: 2
Type: Feature

Restricted
  • Only users with Commit permission may comment.



Sign in to add a comment

Implement WOFF (Web Open Font Format) support

Project Member Reported by pkasting@chromium.org, Oct 22 2009

Issue description

See http://people.mozilla.com/~jkew/woff/woff-spec-latest.html

I don't know whether this is a good idea or not.  
http://hacks.mozilla.org/2009/10/woff/ has a post with some more detail.  
Mozilla listed a number of foundries and other groups supporting it at 
http://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2009/10/20/mozilla-supports-web-open-font-
format/ .
 

Comment 1 by karen@chromium.org, Oct 22 2009

Labels: Mstone-X

Comment 2 Deleted

Comment 3 Deleted

Comment 4 Deleted

Comment 5 by js...@chromium.org, Nov 4 2009

Comment 6 by js...@chromium.org, Nov 19 2009

FYI: IE 9 may support WOFF and raw TTF/OTF. 

I think this is a very important step in creating trust with type foundries here. Hope 
support lands for Chrome soon! :-)
A WOFF to SFNT decoder library (by Jonathan Kew, Mozilla) is available here: 
http://people.mozilla.com/~jkew/woff/woff-code-latest.zip (MPL/GPL/LGPL).

Comment 9 by js...@chromium.org, Apr 22 2010

IE9's support seems now 'official' ( http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20002919-
264.html ). Webkit bug is https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31302


Comment 10 by agl@chromium.org, Apr 23 2010

Status: Assigned
Summary: Implement WOFF (Web Open Font Format) support
It appears that we have decided to implement WOFF in Chromium. I plan on adding 
support to OTS (our transcoder http://code.google.com/p/ots/) so that the transcoded 
fonts will be TTFs on the other side. That way, few WebKit changes should be needed.

Any objections, speak now.

Comment 11 by js...@chromium.org, Apr 23 2010

That seems to be a good idea for Chromium. BTW, have other webkit ports decided to use 
OTS? 

Unfortunately not. Other ports haven't used it.

Comment 13 by jfkth...@gmail.com, Apr 23 2010

Very glad to hear this is in the pipeline.

One point to bear in mind is that it is likely that an eventual W3C recommendation regarding WOFF will include a 
requirement for some form of access control such as a default same-origin policy. The newly-formed WebFonts 
Working Group has yet to address this, so obviously we can't guarantee exactly what the outcome will be, but the 
indications from much past discussion seem clear enough that it would make sense to bear this in mind in 
designing any implementation for a browser.

"so that the transcoded fonts will be TTFs on the other side"

Can you explain any implications in terms of external (end user) access to the 
transcoded TTFs?

(It's worth remembering that a substantial portion of the point of having WOFF as a 
format (though not the entire point by any means) is to deploy web fonts that are not 
directly end-user usable as desktop fonts, even if the specs are public and all. If this 
decision would result in exposing the TTFs more thoroughly to outside users, that 
would be unfortunate.)

Comment 16 by t...@tiro.com, Apr 23 2010

In addition to jfkthame's caveat regarding standardisation of WOFF, and Tom Phinney's
concern regarding exposure of fonts in desktop-installable form in cache -- thereby
undermining one of the key reasons for WOFF --, I would like clarification of the
statement 'transcoded fonts will be TTFs on the other side'. By TTF do you mean both
TrueType and CFF (PostScript) flavour OpenType fonts, either of which can be served
as a WOFF file, or do you mean that you will either only transcoding TrueType fonts
or converting CFF fonts to TTF?

Comment 17 by js...@chromium.org, Apr 24 2010

Comment 18 by agl@chromium.org, Apr 24 2010

Re. access controls:

WOFFs would be transcoded in memory only; never written to disk. Of course, someone could take 
the transcoder and direct its output anywhere. However, that's probably harder than writing a 
simple WOFF->TFF transcoder by hand.

Re. font formats:

CFF tables should be handled by the transcoder. Interested folks should read 
http://code.google.com/p/ots/wiki/DesignDoc
I have a question that why Google want to converts WOFF to TrueType fonts for internal 
handling by the browser. Thank you!
@garridlou
It's because most font APIs, e.g. AddFontMemResourceEx function in Windows gdi32.dll, 
don't support WOFF format directly.

@ yusukes@chromium.org
Thank you very much for your answer! :)
The following revision refers to this bug:
    http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=45932 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
r45932 | agl@chromium.org | 2010-04-29 07:33:49 -0700 (Thu, 29 Apr 2010) | 5 lines
Changed paths:
   M http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/DEPS?r1=45932&r2=45931

OTS roll r26:r30

(Includes WOFF support)

BUG= 25543 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment 25 by agl@chromium.org, Apr 29 2010

Status: Fixed
Fixed pending WebKit's r58517 rolling in. Should be within the next couple of days.
Project Member

Comment 26 by bugdroid1@chromium.org, Oct 12 2012

Labels: Restrict-AddIssueComment-Commit
This issue has been closed for some time. No one will pay attention to new comments.
If you are seeing this bug or have new data, please click New Issue to start a new bug.
Project Member

Comment 27 by bugdroid1@chromium.org, Mar 11 2013

Labels: -Area-WebKit Cr-Content
Project Member

Comment 28 by bugdroid1@chromium.org, Apr 6 2013

Labels: -Cr-Content Cr-Blink

Sign in to add a comment