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

Re: [css3-fonts] editorial issues

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2012 19:10:00 -0700 (PDT)
To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <135529304.4932231.1346638200156.JavaMail.root@mozilla.com>
Yves Lafon wrote:

> * The list of changes [1] contains "Reworked description of default
> features and added 'none' value for 'font-variant-ligatures'" but
> misses the new value 'ordinal' for font-variant-numeric. Are there
> other value changes that I missed?

It's not a new value, it's a value shifted from
'font-variant-position' [1]. The fallback behavior involved with
'font-variant-position' makes that value a better fit under
'font-variant-numeric'.  Similarly, 'contextual' and 'no-contextual'
were shifted from 'font-variant-alternates' to
'font-variant-ligatures' because the nature of those features are more
closely associated with ligature features and it makes it so features
that are on by default are all controlled via 'font-variant-ligatures'.
Subproperties are also now grouped into two loose sets, ones that
affect glyph shape harmonization (ligatures, kerning) and those
that affect glyph shape selection (alternates, numeric, etc.).

> * This is more an editorial RFE, it would be good to have <val>
> linking to the relevant part of the spece where 'val' is defined.
> ie: <common-lig-values> is defined in the 'font-variant-ligatures',
> so easy to spot even if the Value line lists it without a link, but
> from 'font-variant' it is a bit harder to follow. The anchor is
> here, as the index has a link.

This sounds reasonable, I'll work on including that in the next draft.

Cheers,

John Daggett

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-css3-fonts-20111004/#font-variant-position-prop
Received on Monday, 3 September 2012 02:10:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:59 GMT