From: Peter Constable (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Dec 04 2004 - 08:39:46 CST
> From: Philippe Verdy [mailto:email@example.com]
> What alarmed me is that this domain was previously referencing
Not that I know of.
> Also the fact that Microsoft's presentation of OpenType (previously
> Open, previously TrueType) has removed the reference to Apple's
> contributions in TrueType, leaving only Microsoft as the owner of the
> trademark and technology, also partly attributed to Adobe).
The TrueType spec was developed jointly by Apple and Microsoft. The
OpenType spec was developed jointly by Microsoft and Adobe. I wouldn't
expect to see Apple's name on the OpenType spec any more than I would
expect to see Adobe's name on the TrueType spec.
> With Apple now supporting other layout tables, that are not referenced
> the Microsoft documentations for OpenType, this really suggested me a
> split after disagreement (also increased by the new status of
(I have to give you credit for imagination.) Apple has supported other
layout tables for years -- since around 1994.
> What is strange also is that the www.opentype.org web site is a page
> title refers to "Arial Unicode MS". Isn't it a Microsoft font?
Has it occurred to you to look at the font properties to determine who
owns the font? Here's the copyright string:
"Digitized data copyright (C) 1993-2000 Agfa Monotype Corporation. All
rights reserved. Arial(r) is a trademark of The Monotype Corporation
which may be registered in certain jurisdictions."
> These things
> all combined are very intrigating.
Your job title isn't "conspiracy theorist" by any chance?
> Is there a way outside OpenType for other system vendors than
> and Apple? This standard loks more and more proprietary...
Since Apple is not one of the owners of the OpenType spec but they are
starting to support it, how can you conclude that the standard is
looking more and more proprietary? OpenType is the most widely-supported
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Dec 04 2004 - 08:44:55 CST