Re: [css-fonts] Shape of the CSSFontFaceRule interface

Tab Atkins wrote:

> It looks like Chrome and Firefox both implement the old DOM L2 Style
> definition.  Can we just accept that and converge on that definition?
> The current spec appears to be fiction.

It doesn't work to use the old DOM L2 Style decl because it doesn't
include unicode-range and you end up with weird font shorthand issues
that shouldn't exist. So, no, using the old definition is not
appropriate. Additionally, the parsing of the 'family' name is
different, since for the @font-face rule it's a single value and not a
list of names. Same for 'weight', the parsing is different.

The mutation of @font-face rules in Firefox doesn't really work anyways.
I originally wanted to make this read-only but either you or Daniel said
it should be mutable.

So I think this is simply a matter of an unimplemented but necessary
feature (as are many OM interfaces within CSS). It would be great if you
could push to get this changed within Chrome and I can suggest that
Firefox matches that.

Cheers,

John Daggett
Mozilla Japan