- From: John Daggett via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 05:37:35 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> The biggest problem with a no-range solution is that a single > @font-face block cannot service requests for weights of both 300 and > 700. It will (likely) be the common case that a single variation > font will support weights covering most of the 1-999 scale. Not sure what you mean here by "service requests". The font-matching algorithm for `@font-face` font families serves as a way of determining which font resource to download. If the value of the `font-weight`, `font-stretch` and `font-style` properties are applied to the resulting downloaded font resource then you **can** provide both 300 and 700 weights, which is what I'm guessing you mean by "service" here. I think you can definitely come up with complicated, multi-font examples where using the no-range approach is clumsy and awkward but I'm not sure those will ever need to be used in practice, even in complicated scenarios, since the variable font format itself provides so much flexibility to begin with. We can add additional syntax when there's a practical need for it but I'm not convinced that there is in fact a clear need. -- GitHub Notification of comment by nattokirai Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/498#issuecomment-248206293 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 20 September 2016 05:37:43 UTC