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

Re: bolder/lighter defintion

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:24:39 -0400
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20100324032439.GA7212@pickering.dbaron.org>
On Tuesday 2010-03-23 16:23 -0700, fantasai wrote:
> The problem with this proposal is that it doesn't roundtrip very well.
> If I start at 300 and go bolder, then lighter, I don't get back to my

Is there a use case for that?  Is lighter inside bolder something we
expect to be common?  In what cases?  Do they rely on this
invariant?

On Tuesday 2010-03-23 19:11 -0700, John Daggett wrote:
> No, you've missed how bolder/lighter works, the inherited weight is
> first mapped to an existing weight and *then* bolder/lighter is applied.

I thought the point of your proposal was that you were making this
no longer be the case (which I like).

-David

-- 
L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2010 03:25:10 GMT

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