- From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 17:55:01 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
What would be the authoring use case for this? When would you use `system-ui-serif` instead of `serif`? The whole purpose of the generic font keywords is that the results are suited to the system & the user choices. If a new version of Safari wants to update which fonts the generic keywords map to by default, go right ahead. But I don't see a reason to keep `serif` and `monospace` as user-customizable fonts, but then offer authors a way to ignore the user preferences & get the system defaults instead. The fact that these fonts don't have an exposed family name is an implementation detail on MacOS/iOS. If there are technical reasons for that, but you still want them available to web content, I think it's appropriate to continue to use prefixed keywords for them. (I personally don't understand branding logic behind the "don't let people use them in documents, but do let websites use them" argument, but 🤷‍♀ …lawyers. ) > I don't know if Windows has any analogues with Segoe UI. Segoe _is_ a super-family on Windows 10, but it doesn't have monospaced or serif version: it has handwriting versions. Segoe Print is the modern alternative to Comic Sans. While we're on the topic: Segoe UI looks absolutely horrible when rendered without ClearType hinting (e.g., Chrome on Windows). I really hate that we're encouraging developers to use `system-ui` in order to get San Francisco on Apple devices, instead of thinking carefully about their font stack in a cross-browser way. -- GitHub Notification of comment by AmeliaBR Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4107#issuecomment-510976552 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 12 July 2019 17:55:05 UTC