I’d love to see that part updated now that WOFF2 is more settled.

Personally, from what I know about WOFF2 (I left the working group not long after work on WOFF2 got started), it sounds like its potential modifications are minor enough to preserve Functional Equivalence under the OFL, and Victor’s 7-year-old Web Fonts and Reserved Font Names also says that is likely. If this error persist, please contact us with the details Hindi text -> <- Hindi text. The FAQ’s answer to the question, “Can I make and use WOFF (Web Open Font Format) versions of OFL fonts?” is “ Yes, but you need to be careful.” Of course one should be mindful of what a WOFF converter is doing, but I’m only saying exactly what the FAQ says: “Because of the design of the WOFF format, however, it is possible to create a WOFF version that is not considered modification, and so would not require a name change.” Select the font, paste the non Unicode text into left hand side box or Unicode text into right hand side box and press appropriate button for conversion. Getting back to WOFF and modification: Yes, apparently some WOFF converters are not lossless. Stuart, you’re making good points and I agree with some of what you say, but I want to be clear that it has very little to do with the point I’m trying to make and the OP’s question, which was primarily about open source licensing. Another would be to say, “You do not have permission to use this font on the web.” Again, that was not my point at all.Īnd since the OP and a lot of this thread is focused on the OFL, I think it’s a distraction to talk about what commercial EULAs “intend.” It’s not controversial to say that the OFL intends to permit web use, is it? We only get tripped up there because of reserved font names and modification.

I agree it’s perfectly reasonable for one to specify a EULA prohibition against WOFF conversion if one doesn’t want their EULA to allow web use. Click 'Choose Files' button to select multiple files on your computer or click the dropdown button to choose online file from URL, Google Drive or Dropbox. My intention was to clarify a subtle difference between WOFF and WOFF2 in that regard. The point of the OP was to ask whether WOFF conversion is considered modification. I obviously think it’s the same font in a wrapper, but I understand the opposing argument. Web Open Font Format (WOFF/WOFF2) Created for use on the web, and developed by Mozilla in conjunction with other organizations, WOFF fonts often load faster than other formats because they use a compressed version of the structure used by OpenType (OTF) and TrueType (TTF) fonts.

I think it’s interesting to debate, as we have here, whether a font that has been “converted” to WOFF becomes some other kind of font. TrueType font can be converted to EOT by open source utility ttf2eot. Really, my original point was that the original WOFF format does not modify a font. All fonts downloaded via Creative Fabrica can be converted with the Webfont Generator. It just wasn’t my point, and I don’t think it was “incorrect” for me to make it in the context of the OP. The CSS at-rule allows authors to specify online fonts to display text on their web pages.It’s fine to discuss licensing issues and the intent of commercial EULA terms. To reset the selection or start over click the cross in the right upper corner of the Drag and drop area.

Convert ttf to webfont