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

Re: [css2.1][css3-fonts] keywords in unquoted font family names

From: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 22:39:55 +0100
Message-ID: <4FBAB62B.2000107@gmail.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 21/5/12 19:13, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
 > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Bert Bos<bert@w3.org>  wrote:
 >> On May 18, 2012, at 08:34, John Daggett wrote:
 >>> Both Tab and Elika feel that any unquoted name that includes
 >>> keywords like 'inherit' should be invalid, so declarations like
 >>> the ones below would be invalid:
 >>>
 >>>   font-family: foo inherit;
 >>>   font-family: inherit foo;
 >>
 >> I don't see any ambiguity in the spec about these. They are valid 
family names. Some real-world examples would be:
 >>
 >>     font-family: Microsoft Sans Serif
 >>     font-family: Schoolhouse Cursive B
 >
 > I don't understand.  Neither of your examples have global keywords in
 > them, so they don't seem to be relevant.

IMO, a declaration such as

   font-family: poetica supp initial swash capitals;

should be just as valid as

   font-family: microsoft sans serif;

or

   font-family: times new roman;

JK
Received on Monday, 21 May 2012 21:40:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:54 GMT