W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2008

Re: [css3-fonts] Nested 'bolder' and 'lighter' question

From: Simetrical <simetrical@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 17:17:10 -0400
Message-ID: <7c2a12e20808271417w615f15a6v341bbe8c0b1d4f53@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 2:23 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> fantasai wrote:
>> Given
>>  <a>
>>    Text A
>>    <b style="font-weight: bolder">
>>      Text B
>>      <c style="font-weight: bolder">
>>        Text C
>>        <d style="font-weight: lighter">
>>          Text D
>>        </d>
>>      </c>
>>    </b>
>>  </a>
>> If you have three different weights in your font (normal, bold,
>> extra-bold) then
>>  - Text A will be normal
>>  - Text B will be bold
>>  - Text C will be extra-bold
>>  - Text D will be bold
>> If you have only two weights in your font (normal, bold) then
>>  - Text A will be normal
>>  - Text B will be bold
>>  - Text C will be bold
>> What should Text D be? Bold or normal?

Well, if someone is using "bolder" n times in a row, they probably
assume that there are at least n fonts bolder than the default one.
So the intended effect is almost certainly the first case: normal,
bold, extra-bold, bold.  Otherwise, why would you have the second
"bolder"?  So the ideal behavior is clear.

The problem is: what's the closest we can get to this ideal?  One
angle would be to say that the closest you could get is normal, bold,
bold, bold.  This is an obvious route.  The problem is, then you're
effectively ignoring two distinctions you were asked to make: two of
the rules are no-ops.  If you make it normal, bold, bold, normal, then
only one of the rules is a no-op, which is in a way closer.  To take
this line of thought to an extreme, an even closer representation
would be (assuming a "light" font exists) light, normal, bold, normal,
which preserves all rules -- just shifted down.  (But that's not
really practical.)

The question is one of intent, I think.  What are some cases where
this actually comes up?  What sorts of semantics would most often
dictate the use of nested bolder/lighter?  I can't come up with an
example that's not pretty contrived.
Received on Wednesday, 27 August 2008 21:17:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:39 UTC