W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2010

RE: [css3-fonts] opentype font feature support

From: Richard Fink <rfink@readableweb.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 19:40:21 -0500
To: "'Thomas Phinney'" <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>, 'Håkon Wium Lie' <howcome@opera.com>
Cc: "'fantasai'" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, <robert@ocallahan.org>, "'Jonathan Kew'" <jonathan@jfkew.plus.com>, "'www-style list'" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001101cabbfc$7075c700$51615500$@com>
Thursday, March 04, 2010 6:31 PM <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>:

Håkon Wium Lie wrote:
> How about:
>  font-kerning: none | normal | auto

Thomas Phinney wrote:

>I don't much care for "auto" here. Surely "kern" could be used and
>would be clear enough.

I'm losing the semantic gist here, as if the apples were turning to oranges.
If: 
"none" means no kerning.
"normal" means "use the kerning data that exists in the font"
"auto" means "user agent, you make the decision on kerning"

Then "normal" means "kern". "Kern" wouldn't substitute for "auto". Or are
you suggesting that "auto" be excised?

And if I'm getting the apples and oranges mixed up, I'm assuming others
will, too, as I'm no stranger to CSS syntax.

font-kerning: none | normal | auto
seems perfectly ok as long as the properties mean what I think they mean.

Thomas?

Regards,

rich

-----Original Message-----
From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Thomas Phinney
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 6:31 PM
To: Håkon Wium Lie
Cc: fantasai; robert@ocallahan.org; Jonathan Kew; www-style list
Subject: Re: [css3-fonts] opentype font feature support

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com> wrote:
> Also sprach fantasai:
>
>  > >      > 6.1 font-kerning: normal | inherit | enabled | disabled
>  > >      >
>  > >      > There are few properties that use generic on/off state names
like
>  > >     ‘enabled’ and ‘disabled’. I would prefer not to see more of them,
>  > >     but I do not know which pair of words would be better here,
‘kern’/?
>  > >     perhaps.
>  > >
>  > >     I'd be happy to hear alternative suggestions, although as the
draft
>  > >     does not currently include font-kerning as one of the properties
>  > >     controllable via the font shorthand, I don't think the generic
>  > >     "enabled" and "disabled" are particularly problematic here.
>  > >
>  > > How about just naming them 'kerning' and 'no-kerning'? If
'font-kerning:
>  > > kerning' is too weird, perhaps rename 'font-kerning' to
>  > > 'font-glyph-spacing'?
>  >
>  > I'd go with font-kerning: normal | kern | no-kern
>
> We have:
>
>  hyphens: none | manual | auto
>
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-gcpm/#hyphenate
>
> How about:
>
>  font-kerning: none | normal | auto

I don't much care for "auto" here. Surely "kern" could be used and
would be clear enough.

T

-- 
"The rat's perturbed; it must sense nanobots! Code grey! We have a
Helvetica scenario!" — http://xkcd.com/683/
Received on Friday, 5 March 2010 00:40:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:25 GMT