W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2012

RE: [css3-font] unquoted font family names with whitespace

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 18:49:44 +0000
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
CC: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3C4041FF83E1E04A986B6DC50F01782907B35756@TK5EX14MBXC295.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

[L. David Baron:]
> 
> On Friday 2012-03-16 22:19 +0000, Sylvain Galineau wrote:
> > My understanding is that this was good general advice since unquoted
> > font family names may be somewhat more ambiguous in the font shorthand.
> 
> Families aren't any more ambiguous in the 'font' shorthand than they are
> in 'font-family' because, in the 'font' shorthand, the family must come
> immediately after the <font-size> [ / <line-height> ]?
> part.
> 

As line-height is optional and font-size can be a keyword I'd think ambiguity 
is possible e.g. if you want to use Monotype's Medium Roman:

	font: bold medium roman;

and...

	font: bold 'medium roman';


...are not the same thing. The same issue could happen with fonts such as 
'Large Old English Riband", "Large OT", "Large" and a number of other fonts 
for sale on MyFonts.com. I suspect there might even be families that start
with 'small'.

Or am I missing something?
Received on Monday, 19 March 2012 18:50:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 03:48:52 GMT