Chris Lilley wrote: > Lets suppose I have an unusual font which has the family name of > 'bold Palatino'. How would I write a declaration that asks for > normal 14pt/14pt with "Friz Quadrata" as the first family choice, and > "bold Palatino" as the second choice > > H2 { font: normal 14pt/14pt "Friz Quadrata", "bold Palatino", serif } > > > I have also seen font names with numbers etc in them. I am not sure that > your proposed syntax is unambiguous. Particularly for those vendors who > (attempt to) silently cope with missing quotes. How is the problem of missing quotes exacerbated by the relative position of the commas? Is H2 { bold Palatino, serif } any less ambiguous? The size declaration is optional, so in the font shorthand/property, missing quotes is a firm no-no. > The idea of grouping font properties into atomic sets ic certainly > interesting and has also been called for wrt ensuring that runs of > text in a single language use a consistent font (especially languages > which are mostly covered by Latin-1 but have a few extra characters). > > I'm not sure that this particular syntax will fit the bill, however. > Feel free to dissuade me with counter examples, of course. This is a simple solution useful in simple situations, syntactically no less intuitive than the shorthand, yet functionally a superset. Or, more simply, all gain, no pain. I have yet to see a negative example as I don't think the above qualifies. David PerrellReceived on Tuesday, 29 July 1997 18:40:48 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:50 GMT