- From: Chris Lilley via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 17:22:57 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> the CSS specs try to be format-neutral insofar as possible, to define things in a way that's general enough that other font formats can be accommodated. We often have more information on how to work with OT fonts, so they are somewhat better described in the specs Yes, but ... CSS has followed the OpenType spec pretty closely for font weight. The 100 ... 900 values in CSS 1 were directly taken from TrueType and OpenType specs, and that was well before Opentype had the wide deployment it does today. > In other respects, AAT fonts work the same as OT fonts. But this is a specific point on which AAT fonts are non-interoperable. Agreed. I think that giving OpenType primacy and then specifying how other font system can work with those definitions in an interoperable way is fine. -- GitHub Notification of comment by svgeesus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1531#issuecomment-351461459 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 13 December 2017 17:22:58 UTC