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

Re: [css3-fonts] FontLoader v2

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:17:56 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Message-ID: <29357745.188069.1347326276755.JavaMail.root@mozilla.com>
Tab Atkins wrote:

> > Unless we change CSSFontFaceRule to not use CSSStyleDescriptor as
> > a home for the descriptor set, I would oppose not using the
> > fontface object above. That is, I don't want to see two
> > interfaces, both CSSStyleDeclaration and this event object
> > duplicating all the descriptor IDL attributes on different
> > interfaces. DRY DRY DRY
> 
> Theoretical purity falls below author utility.  We shouldn't punish
> authors by forcing them to write ".fontface.style" just because we
> spec authors can't get our act together on the IDL side.

I don't see this as theoretical purity but as practicality.  The
event containing all the descriptors is duping those in the
CSSFontFaceRule.  Which means the event struct definition will need to
track the rule definition.  In general it's better not to be defining
structs that are basically the same thing like this.

While having "loading" and "doneloading" events makes complete sense
to me, I'm not as clear about what the use case for per-font load
events is.  I guess if you're displaying UI for a whole set of fonts
in a font menu you could incrementally expose them as the fonts load. 
Are there other use cases you had in mind?

I think if the attributes in the event were limited to those used by
authors for font selection (i.e. family/weight/stretch/style), I
wouldn't mind as much, it would feel less like you're duping structs.

Cheers,

John
Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2012 01:18:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:00 GMT