On Thu, 2016-09-29 at 12:09 -0700, Chris Lilley wrote: > I agree that this name has, in practice, caused confusion. In a world > where fake bold and fake italic (obliquing) are common, people often > assume that font-stretch geometrically stretches or shrinks the glyph > outlines. Which in at least on implementation I use, it does. And it's a useful feature at times - e.g. if you use it with the stroked (not filled) version of Courier, the result can be very acceptable. Maybe access to the font transformation matrix should be added at the same time this is clarified? Or maybe it's not worth-while, given that you can open the font in a font editor and adjust it. Liam -- Liam R. E. Quin <liam@w3.org> The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) -- GitHub Notification of comment by liamquin Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/551#issuecomment-250637477 using your GitHub accountReceived on Friday, 30 September 2016 01:36:41 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:03 UTC