W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > October 2016

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-fonts-4] font-stretch is unfortunately named

From: Jason Pamental via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:38:52 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-252640667-1476110330-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@Crissov I think the challenge is being mindful of terminology from 
type design and typography while still being accurate. In this case, 
`font-width` is the term that resonates most and aligns more closely 
with existing terminology from the design world, whereas 
`font-stretch` sounds more like something you're generally not 
supposed to do with type (stretch it artificially).

I'm not sure that this is a clear-cut recommendation one way or the 
other, but in balance I've heard from a whole bunch of type 
designers/typographers that they feel `font-width` is preferable, so I
 definitely lean much more in that direction. (Not that it's up to me,
 but I'm doing my best to ensure the design community is 'in the 
conversation', so to speak)

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by jpamental
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/551#issuecomment-252640667 
using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 10 October 2016 14:38:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:04 UTC