W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2009

Re: CSS & Fonts

From: Henrik Hansen <henrikb4@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:10:47 +0100
Message-ID: <dd12cf660903160610l158c421apcfcb3e9ecb058151@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
I can see the use case in the first idea. But the implementation needs some
work.

I don't really have any comments on the second idea. But I'm not supporting
it as now since I can't see any good use.

On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 19:40, Aaron <aaron.cicali@gmail.com> wrote:

> Since we're already font-challenged on the web, wouldn't it be great if
> we could specify an alternate ruleset if a particular font wasn't
> available?
>
> For instance:
>
> body {
>      font: 28px normal georgia, 26px bold times new roman;
> }
>
> In this case we'd be specifying georgia at 28px, but if the user didn't
> have that font, instead we'd go with times new roman but in BOLD at 26px.
>
> While we're at it...how about CSS font anti-aliasing?  Instead of allowing
> silly little programs like Internet Explorer anti-alias ALL fonts on our
> pages
> (even little itty bitty ones), shouldn't WE, the DEVELOPERS be the ones
> specifying which fonts to anti-alias?  I appreciate a good fuzzy edge on
> my headings, it just doesn't make sense in other places.
>
> Thanks for listenin, y'all.
> - Aaron
>
>
> --
> Aaron Cicali
> http://www.aaroncicali.com
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Computer Repair and System Builds
> Web Design and Development
> Wired and Wireless Networking
> Digital Photography and Manipulation
> Consultation and Training
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> HTML, CSS, JavaScript/AJAX, PHP, MySQL
>



-- 
Hilsen Henrik Enggaard Hansen
Received on Monday, 16 March 2009 13:11:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:17 GMT