Thimfora 79

There are no other fonts in this font family.

映瑨攠但䰠潲⁡楮欠瑯⁴桥⁷敢⁶敲獩潮㬠䅮礠剆丠摥捬慲慴楯湳㬠䥮景牭慴楯渠慬牥慤礠灲敳敮琠楮⁴桥⁦潮琠潲⁤潣畭敮瑡瑩潮⁴桡琠灯楮瑳⁢慣欠瑯⁴桥⁏物杩湡氠噥牳楯測⁳畣栠慳⁡楮欠瑯⁴桥⁰牯橥捴爠瑨攠慵瑨潲❳⁷敢獩瑥⸍਍੉映慮灴業楺敤⁦潮琠浥整猠瑨敳攠牥煵楲敭敮瑳Ⱐ慮搠獯⁩猠捯湳楤敲敤⁴漠扥⁆䔬⁴桥渠楴❳⁶敲礠汩步汹⁴桡琠瑨攠潲楧楮慬⁡畴桯爠睯畬搠晥敬⁴桡琠瑨攠潰瑩浩穥搠景湴⁩猠愠杯潤⁡湤⁲敡獯湡扬攠敱畩癡汥湴⸠䥦⁩琠晡汬猠獨潲琠潦⁡湹映瑨敳攠牥煵楲敭敮瑳Ⱐ瑨攠潰瑩浩穥搠景湴⁤潥猠湯琠牥慳潮慢汹⁲数牥獥湴⁴桥⁏物杩湡氠噥牳楯測⁡湤⁳漠獨潵汤⁢攠捯湳楤敲敤⁴漠扥⁡⁍潤楦楥搠噥牳楯渮⁌楫攠潴桥爠䵯摩晩敤⁖敲獩潮猬⁩琠睯畬搠湯琠扥⁡汬潷敤⁴漠畳攠慮礠剆乳⁡湤⁹潵⁳業灬礠湥敤⁴漠灩捫⁹潵爠潷渠景湴慭攮ഊഊ㈮㤠⁉獮❴⁵獥映睥戠景湴猠慮潴桥爠景牭映敭扥摤楮朿ഊ乯⸠啮汩步⁥浢敤摥搠景湴猠楮⁡⁐䑆Ⱐ睥戠景湴猠慲攠湯琠慮⁩湴敧牡瑥搠灡牴映瑨攠摯捵浥湴⁩瑳敬昮⁔桥礠慲攠湯琠獰散楦楣⁴漠愠獩湧汥⁤潣畭敮琠慮搠慲攠潦瑥渠慰灬楥搠瑯⁴桯畳慮摳映摯捵浥湴猠慲潵湤⁴桥⁷潲汤⸠周攠景湴⁤慴愠楳潴⁳瑯牥搠慬潮杳楤攠瑨攠摯捵浥湴⁤慴愠慮搠潦瑥渠潲楧楮慴敳⁦牯洠愠摩晦敲敮琠汯捡瑩潮⸠周攠敡獥⁢礠睨楣栠瑨攠睥戠景湴猠畳敤⁢礠愠摯捵浥湴慹⁢攠楤敮瑩晩敤⁡湤⁤潷湬潡摥搠景爠摥獫瑯瀠畳攠摥浯湳瑲慴敳⁴桡琠瑨敹⁡牥⁰桩汯獯灨楣慬汹⁡湤⁴散桮楣慬汹⁳数慲慴攠晲潭⁴桥⁷敢⁰慧敳⁴桡琠獰散楦礠瑨敭⸠卥攠桴瑰㨯⽳捲楰瑳⹳楬⹯牧⽏䙌彷敢彦潮瑳彡湤归䙎猍਍ਲ⸱〠⁓漠睯畬搠楴⁢攠扥瑴敲⁴漠湯琠畳攠剆乳⁡琠慬氠楦⁹潵⁷慮琠祯畲⁦潮琠瑯⁢攠摩獴物扵瑥搠批⁡⁷敢⁦潮瑳⁳敲癩捥㼍੎漮⁁汴桯畧栠瑨攠但䰠摯敳潴⁲敱畩牥⁡畴桯牳⁴漠畳攠剆乳Ⱐ瑨攠剆丠浥捨慮楳洠楳⁡渠業灯牴慮琠灡牴映瑨攠但䰠浯摥氠慮搠捯浰汥瑥汹⁣潭灡瑩扬攠睩瑨⁷敢⁦潮琠獥牶楣敳⸠䥦⁴桡琠睥戠景湴⁳敲癩捥潤楦楥猠瑨攠景湴猬⁴桥渠瑨攠扥獴⁳潬畴楯渠楳⁴漠獩杮⁡⁳数慲慴攠慧牥敭敮琠景爠瑨攠畳攠潦⁡湹⁒䙎献⁉琠楳⁰敲晥捴汹⁶慬楤⁦潲⁡渠慵瑨潲⁴漠湯琠摥捬慲攠慮礠剆乳Ⱐ扵琠扥景牥⁴桥礠摯⁳漠瑨敹敥搠瑯⁦畬汹⁵湤敲獴慮搠瑨攠扥湥晩瑳⁴桥礠慲攠杩癩湧⁵瀬⁡湤⁴桥癥牡汬敧慴楶攠敦晥捴映慬汯睩湧慮礠摩晦敲敮琠癥牳楯湳⁢敡物湧⁴桥⁳慭攠湡浥⁴漠扥⁷楤敬礠摩獴物扵瑥搮⁁猠愠牥獵汴Ⱐ睥⁤潮❴⁧敮敲慬汹⁲散潭浥湤⁩琮ഊഊ㈮ㄱ†坨慴⁳桯畬搠慮⁡杲敥浥湴⁦潲⁴桥⁵獥映剆乳⁳慹㼠䅲攠瑨敲攠慮礠數慭灬敳㼍੔桥牥⁩猠湯⁰牥獣物扥搠景牭慴⁦潲⁴桩猠慧牥敭敮琬⁡猠汥条氠獹獴敭猠癡特Ⱐ慮搠湯⁲散潭浥湤敤⁥硡浰汥献⁁畴桯牳慹⁷楳栠瑯⁡摤⁳灥捩晩挠捬慵獥猠瑯⁦畲瑨敲⁲敳瑲楣琠畳攬⁲敱畩牥⁡畴桯爠牥癩敷映䵯摩晩敤⁖敲獩潮猬⁥獴慢汩獨⁵獥爠獵灰潲琠浥捨慮楳浳爠灲潶楤攠瑥牭猠景爠敮摩湧⁴桥⁡杲敥浥湴⸠卵捨⁡杲敥浥湴猠慲攠畳畡汬礠湯琠灵扬楣Ⱐ慮搠慰灬礠潮汹⁴漠瑨攠浡楮⁰慲瑩敳⸠䡯睥癥爬⁩琠睯畬搠扥⁶敲礠扥湥晩捩慬⁦潲⁷敢⁦潮琠獥牶楣敳⁴漠捬敡牬礠獴慴攠睨敮⁴桥礠桡癥⁥獴慢汩獨敤⁳畣栠慧牥敭敮瑳Ⱐ獯⁴桡琠瑨攠灵扬楣⁵湤敲獴慮摳⁣汥慲汹⁴桡琠瑨敩爠獥牶楣攠楳灥牡瑩湧⁡灰牯灲楡瑥汹⸍਍੓敥⁴桥⁳数慲慴攠灡灥爠潮‧坥戠䙯湴猠☠剆乳✠景爠楮ⵤ数瑨⁤楳捵獳楯渠潦⁩獳略猠牥污瑥搠瑯⁴桥⁵獥映剆乳⁦潲⁷敢⁦潮瑳⸠周楳⁩猠慶慩污扬攠慴⁨瑴瀺⼯獣物灴献獩氮潲术但䱟睥扟景湴獟慮摟剆乳ഊഊഊ㌠⁍佄䥆奉乇⁏䙌ⵌ䥃䕎卅䐠䙏乔匍਍ਲ਼⸱†䍡渠䤠捨慮来⁴桥⁦潮瑳㼠䅲攠瑨敲攠慮礠汩浩瑡瑩潮猠瑯⁷桡琠瑨楮杳⁉⁣慮⁡湤⁣慮湯琠捨慮来㼍ਖ਼潵⁡牥⁡汬潷敤⁴漠捨慮来⁡湹瑨楮本⁡猠汯湧⁡猠獵捨⁣桡湧敳⁤漠湯琠癩潬慴攠瑨攠瑥牭猠潦⁴桥楣敮獥⸠䥮瑨敲⁷潲摳Ⱐ祯甠慲攠湯琠慬汯睥搠瑯⁲敭潶攠瑨攠捯灹物杨琠獴慴敭敮琨猩⁦牯洠瑨攠景湴Ⱐ扵琠祯甠捯畬搠灵琠慤摩瑩潮慬⁩湦潲浡瑩潮⁩湴漠楴⁴桡琠捯癥牳⁹潵爠捯湴物扵瑩潮⸠卥攠瑨攠灬慣敨潬摥牳⁩渠瑨攠但䰠桥慤敲⁴敭灬慴攠景爠牥捯浭敮摡瑩潮猠潮⁷桥牥⁴漠慤搠祯畲睮⁳瑡瑥浥湴献
剥浥浢敲⁴桡琬⁷桥渠慵瑨潲猠桡癥⁲敳敲癥搠湡浥猠癩愠瑨攠剆丠浥捨慮楳洬⁹潵敥搠瑯⁣桡湧攠瑨攠楮瑥牮慬慭敳映瑨攠景湴⁴漠祯畲睮⁦潮琠湡浥⁷桥渠浡歩湧⁹潵爠浯摩晩敤⁶敲獩潮⁥癥渠楦⁩琠楳畳琠愠獭慬氠捨慮来⸩ഊഊ㌮㈠⁉⁨慶攠愠景湴⁴桡琠湥敤猠愠晥眠數瑲愠杬祰桳‭⁣慮⁉⁴慫攠瑨敭⁦牯洠慮⁏䙌楣敮獥搠景湴⁡湤⁣潰礠瑨敭⁩湴漠浩湥㼍ਖ਼敳Ⱐ扵琠楦⁹潵⁤楳瑲楢畴攠瑨慴⁦潮琠瑯瑨敲猠楴畳琠扥⁵湤敲⁴桥⁏䙌Ⱐ慮搠楮捬畤攠瑨攠楮景牭慴楯渠浥湴楯湥搠楮⁣潮摩瑩潮′映瑨攠汩捥湳攮ഊഊ㌮㌠⁃慮⁉⁣桡牧攠灥潰汥⁦潲礠慤摩瑩潮慬⁷潲欿⁉渠潴桥爠睯牤猬⁩映䤠慤搠愠扵湣栠潦⁳灥捩慬⁧汹灨猠潲⁏灥湔祰支䝲慰桩瑥⽁䅔⁣潤攬⁣慮⁉⁳敬氠瑨攠敮桡湣敤⁦潮琿ഊ乯琠批⁩瑳敬昮⁄敲楶慴楶攠景湴猠浵獴⁢攠牥汥慳敤⁵湤敲⁴桥⁏䙌⁡湤⁣慮湯琠扥⁳潬搠批⁴桥浳敬癥献⁉琠楳⁰敲浩瑴敤Ⱐ桯睥癥爬⁴漠楮捬畤攠瑨敭⁩渠愠污牧敲⁳潦瑷慲攠灡捫慧攠⡳畣栠慳⁴數琠敤楴潲猬晦楣攠獵楴敳爠潰敲慴楮朠獹獴敭猩Ⱐ敶敮⁩映瑨攠污牧敲⁰慣歡来⁩猠獯汤⸠䥮⁴桡琠捡獥Ⱐ祯甠慲攠獴牯湧汹⁥湣潵牡来搬⁢畴潴⁲敱畩牥搬⁴漠慬獯慫攠瑨慴⁤敲楶敤⁦潮琠敡獩汹⁡湤⁦牥敬礠慶慩污扬攠潵瑳楤攠潦⁴桥慲来爠灡捫慧攮ഊഊ㌮㐠⁃慮⁉⁰慹⁳潭敯湥⁴漠敮桡湣攠瑨攠景湴猠景爠浹⁵獥⁡湤⁤楳瑲楢畴楯渿ഊ奥献⁔桩猠楳⁡⁧潯搠睡礠瑯⁦畮搠瑨攠晵牴桥爠摥癥汯灭敮琠潦⁴桥⁦潮瑳⸠䭥数⁩渠浩湤Ⱐ桯睥癥爬⁴桡琠楦⁴桥⁦潮琠楳⁤楳瑲楢畴敤⁴漠潴桥牳⁩琠浵獴⁢攠畮摥爠瑨攠但䰮⁙潵⁷潮❴⁢攠慢汥⁴漠牥捯癥爠祯畲⁩湶敳瑭敮琠批⁥硣汵獩癥汹⁳敬汩湧⁴桥⁦潮琬⁢畴⁹潵⁷楬氠扥慫楮朠愠癡汵慢汥⁣潮瑲楢畴楯渠瑯⁴桥⁣潭浵湩瑹⸠偬敡獥⁲敭敭扥爠桯眠祯甠桡癥⁢敮敦楴敤⁦牯洠瑨攠捯湴物扵瑩潮猠潦瑨敲献ഊഊ㌮㔠⁉敥搠瑯慫攠獵扳瑡湴楡氠牥癩獩潮猠瑯⁴桥⁦潮琠瑯慫攠楴⁷潲欠睩瑨礠灲潧牡洮⁉琠睩汬⁢攠愠汯琠潦⁷潲欬⁡湤⁡⁢楧⁩湶敳瑨瑴瀺⼯獣物灴献獩氮潲术捭猯獣物灴猯灡来⹰桰㽳楴敟楤㵮牳椦楤㵏䙌Copyright (c) 2013 by naraphim. All rights reserved.Thimfora_79Thimfora_791.000;PYRS;Thimfora_79Thimfora_79Version 001.000Thimfora_79Thimfora_79 is a trademark of naraphim.naraphimnaraphimOFL FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions about the SIL Open Font License (OFL)
Version 1.1-update3 - Sept 2013
(See http://scripts.sil.org/OFL for updates)


CONTENTS OF THIS FAQ
1 USING AND DISTRIBUTING FONTS LICENSED UNDER THE OFL
2 USING OFL FONTS FOR WEB PAGES AND ONLINE WEB FONT SERVICES
3 MODIFYING OFL-LICENSED FONTS
4 LICENSING YOUR ORIGINAL FONTS UNDER THE OFL
5 CHOOSING RESERVED FONT NAMES
6 ABOUT THE FONTLOG
7 MAKING CONTRIBUTIONS TO OFL PROJECTS
8 ABOUT THE LICENSE ITSELF
9 ABOUT SIL INTERNATIONAL
APPENDIX A - FONTLOG EXAMPLE

1 USING AND DISTRIBUTING FONTS LICENSED UNDER THE OFL

1.1 Can I use the fonts for a book or other print publication, to create logos or other graphics or even to manufacture objects based on their outlines?
Yes. You are very welcome to do so. Authors of fonts released under the OFL allow you to use their font software as such for any kind of design work. No additional license or permission is required, unlike with some other licenses. Some examples of these uses are: logos, posters, business cards, stationery, video titling, signage, t-shirts, personalised fabric, 3D-printed/laser-cut shapes, sculptures, rubber stamps, cookie cutters and lead type.

1.1.1 Does that restrict the license or distribution of that artwork?
No. You remain the author and copyright holder of that newly derived graphic or object. You are simply using an open font in the design process. It is only when you redistribute, bundle or modify the font itself that other conditions of the license have to be respected (see below for more details).

1.1.2 Is any kind of acknowledgement required?
No. Font authors may appreciate being mentioned in your artwork's acknowledgements alongside the name of the font, possibly with a link to their website, but that is not required.

1.2 Can the fonts be included with Free/Libre and Open Source Software collections such as GNU/Linux and BSD distributions and repositories?
Yes! Fonts licensed under the OFL can be freely included alongside other software under FLOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software) licenses. Since fonts are typically aggregated with, not merged into, existing software, there is little need to be concerned about incompatibility with existing software licenses. You may also repackage the fonts and the accompanying components in a .rpm or .deb package (or other similar package formats or installers) and include them in distribution CD/DVDs and online repositories. (Also see section 5.9 about rebuilding from source.)

1.3 I want to distribute the fonts with my program. Does this mean my program also has to be Free/Libre and Open Source Software?
No. Only the portions based on the Font Software are required to be released under the OFL. The intent of the license is to allow aggregation or bundling with software under restricted licensing as well.

1.4 Can I sell a software package that includes these fonts?
Yes, you can do this with both the Original Version and a Modified Version of the fonts. Examples of bundling made possible by the OFL would include: word processors, design and publishing applications, training and educational software, games and entertainment software, mobile device applications, etc.

1.5 Can I include the fonts on a CD of freeware or commercial fonts?
Yes, as long some other font or software is also on the disk, so the OFL font is not sold by itself.

1.6 Why won't the OFL let me sell the fonts alone?
The intent is to keep people from making money by simply redistributing the fonts. The only people who ought to profit directly from the fonts should be the original authors, and those authors have kindly given up potential direct income to distribute their fonts under the OFL. Please honour and respect their contribution!

1.7 What about sharing OFL fonts with friends on a CD, DVD or USB stick?
You are very welcome to share open fonts with friends, family and colleagues through removable media. Just remember to include the full font package, including any copyright notices and licensing information as available in OFL.txt. In the case where you sell the font, it has to come bundled with software.

1.8 Can I host the fonts on a web site for others to use?
Yes, as long as you make the full font package available. In most cases it may be best to point users to the main site that distributes the Original Version so they always get the most recent stable and complete version. See also discussion of web fonts in Section 2.

1.9 Can I host the fonts on a server for use over our internal network?
Yes. If the fonts are transferred from the server to the client computer by means that allow them to be used even if the computer is no longer attached to the network, the full package (copyright notices, licensing information, etc.) should be included.

1.10 Does the full OFL license text always need to accompany the font?
The only situation in which an OFL font can be distributed without the text of the OFL (either in a separate file or in font metadata), is when a font is embedded in a document or bundled within a program. In the case of metadata included within a font, it is legally sufficient to include only a link to the text of the OFL on http://scripts.sil.org/OFL, but we strongly recommend against this. Most modern font formats include metadata fields that will accept the full OFL text, and full inclusion increases the likelihood that users will understand and properly apply the license.

1.11 What do you mean by 'embedding'? How does that differ from other means of distribution?
By 'embedding' we mean inclusion of the font in a document or file in a way that makes extraction (and redistribution) difficult or clearly discouraged. In many cases the names of embedded fonts might also not be obvious to those reading the document, the font data format might be altered, and only a subset of the font - only the glyphs required for the text - might be included. Any other means of delivering a font to another person is considered 'distribution', and needs to be accompanied by any copyright notices and licensing information available in OFL.txt.

1.12 So can I embed OFL fonts in my document?
Yes, either in full or a subset. The restrictions regarding font modification and redistribution do not apply, as the font is not intended for use outside the document.

1.13 Does embedding alter the license of the document itself?
No. Referencing or embedding an OFL font in any document does not change the license of the document itself. The requirement for fonts to remain under the OFL does not apply to any document created using the fonts and their derivatives. Similarly, creating any kind of graphic using a font under OFL does not make the resulting artwork subject to the OFL.

1.14 If OFL fonts are extracted from a document in which they are embedded (such as a PDF file), what can be done with them? Is this a risk to author(s)?
The few utilities that can extract fonts embedded in a PDF will typically output limited amounts of outlines - not a complete font. To create a working font from this method is much more difficult and time consuming than finding the source of the original OFL font. So there is little chance that an OFL font would be extracted and redistributed inappropriately through this method. Even so, copyright laws address any misrepresentation of authorship. All Font Software released under the OFL and marked as such by the author(s) is intended to remain under this license regardless of the distribution method, and cannot be redistributed under any other license. We strongly discourage any font extraction - we recommend directly using the font sources instead - but if you extract font outlines from a document, please be considerate: respect the work of the author(s) and the licensing model.

1.15 What about distributing fonts with a document? Within a compressed folder structure? Is it distribution, bundling or embedding?
Certain document formats may allow the inclusion of an unmodified font within their file structure which may consist of a compressed folder containing the various resources forming the document (such as pictures and thumbnails). Including fonts within such a structure is understood as being different from embedding but rather similar to bundling (or mere aggregation) which the license explicitly allows. In this case the font is conveyed unchanged whereas embedding a font usually transforms it from the original format. The OFL does not allow anyone to extract the font from such a structure to then redistribute it under another license. The explicit permission to redistribute and embed does not cancel the requirement for the Font Software to remain under the license chosen by its author(s). Even if the font travels inside the document as one of its assets, it should not lose its authorship information and licensing.

1.16 What about ebooks shipping with open fonts?
The requirements differ depending on whether the fonts are linked, embedded or distributed (bundled or aggregated). Some ebook formats use web technologies to do font linking via @font-face, others are designed for font embedding, some use fonts distributed with the document or reading software, and a few rely solely on the fonts already present on the target system. The license requirements depend on the type of inclusion as discussed in 1.15.

1.17 Can Font Software released under the OFL be subject to URL-based access restrictions methods or DRM (Digital Rights Management) mechanisms?
Yes, but these issues are out-of-scope for the OFL. The license itself neither encourages their use nor prohibits them since such mechanisms are not implemented in the components of the Font Software but through external software. Such restrictions are put in place for many different purposes corresponding to various usage scenarios. One common example is to limit potentially dangerous cross-site scripting attacks. However, in the spirit of libre/open fonts and unrestricted writing systems, we strongly encourage open sharing and reuse of OFL fonts, and the establishment of an environment where such restrictions are unnecessary. Note that whether you wish to use such mechanisms or you prefer not to, you must still abide by the rules set forth by the OFL when using fonts released by their authors under this license. Derivative fonts must be licensed under the OFL, even if they are part of a service for which you charge fees and/or for which access to source code is restricted. You may not sell the fonts on their own - they must be part of a larger software package, bundle or subscription plan. For example, even if the OFL font is distributed in a software package or via an online service using a DRM mechanism, the user would still have the right to extract that font, use, study, modify and redistribute it under the OFL.

1.18 I've come across a font released under the OFL. How can I easily get more information about the Original Version? How can I know where it stands compared to the Original Version or other Modified Versions?
Consult the copyright statement(s) in the license for ways to contact the original authors. Consult the FONTLOG (see section 6 for more details and examples) for information on how the font differs from the Original Version, and get in touch with the various contributors via the information in the acknowledgement section. Please consider using the Original Versions of the fonts whenever possible.

1.19 What do you mean in condition 4 of the OFL's permissions and conditions? Can you provide examples of abusive promotion / endorsement / advertisement vs. normal acknowledgement?
The intent is that the goodwill and reputation of the author(s) should not be used in a way that makes it sound like the original author(s) endorse or approve of a specific Modified Version or software bundle. For example, it would not be right to advertise a word processor by naming the author(s) in a listing of software features, or to promote a Modified Version on a web site by saying "designed by ...". However, it would be appropriate to acknowledge the author(s) if your software package has a list of people who deserve thanks. We realize that this can seem to be a grey area, but the standard used to judge an acknowledgement is that if the acknowledgement benefits the author(s) it is allowed, but if it primarily benefits other parties, or could reflect poorly on the author(s), then it is not.

1.20 I'm writing a small app for mobile platforms, do I need to include the whole package?
If you bundle a font under the OFL with your mobile app you must comply with the terms of the license. At a minimum you must include the copyright statement, the license notice and the license text. A mention of this information in your About box or Changelog, with a link to where the font package is from, is good practice, and the extra space needed to carry these items is very small. You do not, however, need to include the full contents of the font package - only the fonts you use and the copyright and license that apply to them. For example, if you only use the regular weight in your app, you do not need to include the italic and bold versions.

1.21 What about including OFL fonts by default in my firmware or dedicated operating system?
Many such systems are restricted and turned into appliances so that users cannot study or modify them. Using open fonts to increase quality and language coverage is a great idea, but you need to be aware that if there is a way for users to extract fonts you cannot legally prevent them from doing that. The fonts themselves, including any changes you make to them, must be distributed under the OFL even if your firmware has a more restrictive license. If you do transform the fonts and change their formats when you include them in your firmware you must respect any names reserved by the font authors via the RFN mechanism and pick your own font name. Alternatively if you directly add a font under the OFL to the font folder of your firmware without modifying or optimizing it you are simply bundling the font like with any other software collection, and do not need to make any further changes.

1.22 Can I make and publish CMS themes or templates that use OFL fonts? Can I include the fonts themselves in the themes or templates? Can I sell the whole package?
Yes, you are very welcome to integrate open fonts into themes and templates for your preferred CMS and make them more widely available. Remember that you can only sell the fonts and your CMS add-on as part of a software bundle. (See 1.4 for details and examples about selling bundles).

1.23 Can OFL fonts be included in services that deliver fonts to the desktop from remote repositories? Even if they contain both OFL and non-OFL fonts?
Yes. Some foundries have set up services to deliver fonts to subscribers directly to desktops from their online repositories; similarly, plugins are available to preview and use fonts directly in your design tool or publishing suite. These services may mix open and restricted fonts in the same channel, however they should make a clear distinction between them to users. These services should also not hinder users (such as through DRM or obfuscation mechanisms) from extracting and using the OFL fonts in other environments, or continuing to use OFL fonts after subscription terms have ended, as those uses are specifically allowed by the OFL.

1.24 Can services that provide or distribute OFL fonts restrict my use of them?
No. The terms of use of such services cannot replace or restrict the terms of the OFL, as that would be the same as distributing the fonts under a different license, which is not allowed. You are still entitled to use, modify and redistribute them as the original authors have intended outside of the sole control of that particular distribution channel. Note, however, that the fonts provided by these services may differ from the Original Versions.


2 USING OFL FONTS FOR WEBPAGES AND ONLINE WEB FONT SERVICES

NOTE: This section often refers to a separate paper on 'Web Fonts & RFNs'. This is available at http://scripts.sil.org/OFL_web_fonts_and_RFNs

2.1 Can I make webpages using these fonts?
Yes! Go ahead! Using CSS (Cascading Style Sheets) is recommended. Your three best options are:
- referring directly in your stylesheet to open fonts which may be available on the user's system
- providing links to download the full package of the font - either from your own website or from elsewhere - so users can install it themselves
- using @font-face to distribute the font directly to browsers. This is recommended and explicitly allowed by the licensing model because it is distribution. The font file itself is distributed with other components of the webpage. It is not embedded in the webpage but referenced through a web address which will cause the browser to retrieve and use the corresponding font to render the webpage (see 1.11 and 1.15 for details related to embedding fonts into documents). As you take advantage of the @font-face cross-platform standard, be aware that web fonts are often tuned for a web environment and not intended for installation and use outside a browser. The reasons in favour of using web fonts are to allow design of dynamic text elements instead of static graphics, to make it easier for content to be localized and translated, indexed and searched, and all this with cross-platform open standards without depending on restricted extensions or plugins. You should check the CSS cascade (the order in which fonts are being called or delivered to your users) when testing.

2.2 Can I make and use WOFF (Web Open Font Format) versions of OFL fonts?
Yes, but you need to be careful. A change in font format normally is considered modification, and Reserved Font Names (RFNs) cannot be used. 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. You are allowed to create, use and distribute a WOFF version of an OFL font without changing the font name, but only if:

- the original font data remains unchanged except for WOFF compression, and
- WOFF-specific metadata is either omitted altogether or present and includes, unaltered, the contents of all equivalent metadata in the original font.

If the original font data or metadata is changed, or the WOFF-specific metadata is incomplete, the font must be considered a Modified Version, the OFL restrictions would apply and the name of the font must be changed: any RFNs cannot be used and copyright notices and licensing information must be included and cannot be deleted or modified. You must come up with a unique name - we recommend one corresponding to your domain or your particular web application. Be aware that only the original author(s) can use RFNs. This is to prevent collisions between a derivative tuned to your audience and the original upstream version and so to reduce confusion.

Please note that most WOFF conversion tools and online services do not meet the two requirements listed above, and so their output must be considered a Modified Version. So be very careful and check to be sure that the tool or service you're using is compressing unchanged data and completely and accurately reflecting the original font metadata.

2.3 What about other web font formats such as EOT/EOTLite/CWT/etc.?
In most cases these formats alter the original font data more than WOFF, and do not completely support appropriate metadata, so their use must be considered modification and RFNs may not be used. However, there may be certain formats or usage scenarios that may allow the use of RFNs. See http://scripts.sil.org/OFL_web_fonts_and_RFNs

2.4 Can I make OFL fonts available through web font online services?
Yes, you are welcome to include OFL fonts in online web font services as long as you properly meet all the conditions of the license. The origin and open status of the font should be clear among the other fonts you are hosting. Authorship, copyright notices and license information must be sufficiently visible to your users or subscribers so they know where the font comes from and the rights granted by the author(s). Make sure the font file contains the needed copyright notice(s) and licensing information in its metadata. Please double-check the accuracy of every field to prevent contradictory information. Other font formats, including EOT/EOTLite/CWT and superior alternatives like WOFF, already provide fields for this information. Remember that if you modify the font within your library or convert it to another format for any reason the OFL restrictions apply and you need to change the names accordingly. Please respect the author's wishes as expressed in the OFL and do not misrepresent original designers and their work. Don't lump quality open fonts together with dubious freeware or public domain fonts. Consider how you can best work with the original designers and foundries, support their efforts and generate goodwill that will benefit your service. (See 1.17 for details related to URL-based access restrictions methods or DRM mechanisms).

2.5 Some web font formats and services provide ways of "optimizing" the font for a particular website or web application; is that allowed?
Yes, it is permitted, but remember that these optimized versions are Modified Versions and so must follow OFL requirements like appropriate renaming. Also you need to bear in mind the other important parameters beyond compression, speed and responsiveness: you need to consider the audience of your particular website or web application, as choosing some optimization parameters may turn out to be less than ideal for them. Subsetting by removing certain glyphs or features may seriously limit functionality of the font in various languages that your users expect. It may also introduce degradation of quality in the rendering or specific bugs on the various target platforms compared to the original font from upstream. In other words, remember that one person's optimized font may be another person's missing feature. Various advanced typographic features (OpenType, Graphite or AAT) are also available through CSS and may provide the desired effects without the need to modify the font.

2.6 Is subsetting a web font considered modification?
Yes. Removing any parts of the font when delivering a web font to a browser, including unused glyphs and smart font code, is considered modification. This is permitted by the OFL but would not normally allow the use of RFNs. Some newer subsetting technologies may be able to subset in a way that allows users to effectively have access to the complete font, including smart font behaviour. See 2.8 and http://scripts.sil.org/OFL_web_fonts_and_RFNs

2.7 Are there any situations in which a modified web font could use RFNs?
Yes. If a web font is optimized only in ways that preserve Functional Equivalence (see 2.8), then it may use RFNs, as it reasonably represents the Original Version and respects the intentions of the author(s) and the main purposes of the RFN mechanism (avoids collisions, protects authors, minimizes support, encourages derivatives). However this is technically very difficult and often impractical, so a much better scenario is for the web font service or provider to sign a separate agreement with the author(s) that allows the use of RFNs for Modified Versions.

2.8 How do you know if an optimization to a web font preserves Functional Equivalence?
Functional Equivalence is described in full in the 'Web fonts and RFNs' paper at http://scripts.sil.org/OFL_web_fonts_and_RFNs, in general, an optimized font is deemed to be Functionally Equivalent (FE) to the Original Version if it:

- Supports the same full character inventory. If a character can be properly displayed using the Original Version, then that same character, encoded correctly on a web page, will display properly.
- Provides the same smart font behavior. Any dynamic shaping behavior that works with the Original Version should work when optimized, unless the browser or environment does not support it. There does not need to be guaranteed support in the client, but there should be no forced degradation of smart font or shaping behavior, such as the removal or obfuscation of OpenType, Graphite or AAT tables.
- Presents text with no obvious degradation in visual quality. The lettershapes should be equally (or more) readable, within limits of the rendering platform.
- Preserves original author, project and license metadata. At a minimum, this should include: Copyright and authorship; The license as stated in the Original Version, whether that is the full text of the OFL or a link to the web version; Any RFN declarations; Information already present in the font or documentation that points back to the Original Version, such as a link to the project or the author's website.

If an optimized font meets these requirements, and so is considered to be FE, then it's very likely that the original author would feel that the optimized font is a good and reasonable equivalent. If it falls short of any of these requirements, the optimized font does not reasonably represent the Original Version, and so should be considered to be a Modified Version. Like other Modified Versions, it would not be allowed to use any RFNs and you simply need to pick your own font name.

2.9 Isn't use of web fonts another form of embedding?
No. Unlike embedded fonts in a PDF, web fonts are not an integrated part of the document itself. They are not specific to a single document and are often applied to thousands of documents around the world. The font data is not stored alongside the document data and often originates from a different location. The ease by which the web fonts used by a document may be identified and downloaded for desktop use demonstrates that they are philosophically and technically separate from the web pages that specify them. See http://scripts.sil.org/OFL_web_fonts_and_RFNs

2.10 So would it be better to not use RFNs at all if you want your font to be distributed by a web fonts service?
No. Although the OFL does not require authors to use RFNs, the RFN mechanism is an important part of the OFL model and completely compatible with web font services. If that web font service modifies the fonts, then the best solution is to sign a separate agreement for the use of any RFNs. It is perfectly valid for an author to not declare any RFNs, but before they do so they need to fully understand the benefits they are giving up, and the overall negative effect of allowing many different versions bearing the same name to be widely distributed. As a result, we don't generally recommend it.

2.11 What should an agreement for the use of RFNs say? Are there any examples?
There is no prescribed format for this agreement, as legal systems vary, and no recommended examples. Authors may wish to add specific clauses to further restrict use, req