- From: Myles C. Maxfield via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2017 00:58:04 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
litherum has just created a new issue for
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts:
== [css-fonts-3] [css-fonts-4] getComputedStyle() and
CSSStyleDeclaration of expanded shorthand ==
In CSS2.1, the `font` shorthand
[accepted](https://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/fonts.html#font-shorthand)
values `normal` and `small-caps` for its `font-variant` constituent
longhand.
In CSS Fonts level 3, `font-variant` was
[expanded](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts/#propdef-font-variant)
to accept many new keywords. However, the `font` shorthand was [not
similarly
expanded](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts/#font-variant-css21-values):
It still only accepts `normal` and `small-caps`.
This forces us to ask the question, what is the value of:
```
<div id="test1" style="font: 16px Times; font-variant:
historical-ligatures;">Hello World</div>
...
window.getComputedStyle(document.getElementById("test1")).getPropertyValue("font");
document.getElementById("test1").style.font;
```
This is also relevant to the variable fonts discussion: the
`font-weight`, `font-stretch`, and `font-style` properties are part of
the `font` shorthand, and are also becoming more expressive.
Currently, in WebKit, I'm proceeding as if the expanded values are
equivalent to `normal` when constructing these strings. I'm not sure
if this is the right way to go.
See also: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/515
cc @fantasai @tabatkins
Please view or discuss this issue at
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1076 using your GitHub
account
Received on Saturday, 4 March 2017 00:58:11 UTC