W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2016

Re: [css-fonts] About the breaking change to CSSFontFaceRule interface

From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 09:27:37 +0200
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, John Daggett <jdaggett@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <90E70103-516E-48CD-B9D5-50902181A3DF@disruptive-innovations.com>
To: Xidorn Quan <me@upsuper.org>
I have only one (rather big) issue with the proposal: it's not very friendly with experimental features/polyfills since there is no extra storage room for user-defined font features... I don't think we should ship any more anything at grammar-level that is not extensible because all properties/features are hardcoded.

</Daniel>

Envoyé de mon iPhone

> Le 2 août 2016 à 08:59, Xidorn Quan <me@upsuper.org> a écrit :
> 
> Currently, the CSSFontFaceRule interface described in CSS Fonts spec is
> not what is implemented in browsers. There were some discussions in the
> mailing list last year, and John Daggett said he would try to implement
> the new interface in Firefox [1], but it seems he didn't get a chance to
> finish that before he left Mozilla.
> 
> Now I'd like to try finishing that work, but before that I want to hear
> from other engines if you are happy with the current shape of
> CSSFontFaceRule interface in the spec, and willing to implement this
> breaking change and take the compatibility risk soonish if Gecko does.
> 
> I found that Chrome Platform Status added a measure for
> CSSFontFaceRule.style at the end of last year, and the data shows
> ~0.045% of pages try to access that attribute [2]. IIRC, Chrome's
> safe-to-break line is 0.03%, so it's higher than that line. Do you think
> breaking this would be acceptable?
> 
> The current impls aren't quite interoperable, e.g. the object returned
> from CSSFontFaceRule.style includes all properties from
> CSSStyleDeclaration in all engines except Gecko, and setting attributes
> of that object would lead to different behavior in different engines. So
> we would need to do something anyway.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> In addition, any idea about how websites are currently using that
> attribute would be helpful as well.
> 
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015Dec/0144.html
> [2]
> https://www.chromestatus.com/metrics/feature/timeline/popularity/1082
> 
> - Xidorn
> 
Received on Tuesday, 2 August 2016 07:28:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 2 August 2016 07:28:17 UTC