W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > March 2017

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-fonts-4][varfont] Automatic optical size/style selection

From: dberlow via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 12:39:10 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-285659202-1489149548-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
This issue has haunted us for a long time.

There are two zooms now, the original cinemagraphic zoom that retains the
layout while pushing the edges off the page. As if a user grabbed a
magnifying glass or moved closer the reading material— this is not helped
much by variations.

The other, browser zoom, which scales the type and leaves the layout, has
potential for using variation’s opsz, an axis in which the widths of glyphs
are typically reduced as size increases, traditionally for better spacial
economy on the page. In this zoom, whatever height factor the user wishes,
can be scaled to, but by using optical size, the user would also get more
text on the screen than scaling the type without opsz.

I hope that helps.

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 1:42 AM, Myles C. Maxfield <notifications@github.com
> wrote:

> I think it's important to say that this size selection happens before
> browser zoom or OS scaling.
> It already does, to some extent. It states that only zooms which affect
> layout may change the selected value for this variation axis. However, I
> can't define what layout-affecting zoom is because every browser has their
> own concept of zoom and many of them are subtly different. (And, by that
> same logic, I also don't want to specify what exactly "layout" is either.)
> I don't want to specify the exact algorithm for selecting the variation
> axis value because this should be a place where browsers are allowed to
> innovate. But I also do want to help implementers not choose a terrible
> algorithm. That's the reason for the "This is a good place to start, but
> feel free to expand beyond it" wording. Perhaps we could put an explanation
> in non-normative text describing that this value is expected to be "close"
> to font size. What do you think?
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/807#issuecomment-285591114>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB3ajl4VwkX5paUwrnYc1sicWpCQur1Oks5rkPDZgaJpZM4LNkzU>
> .

GitHub Notification of comment by dberlow
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/807#issuecomment-285659202 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 10 March 2017 12:39:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:09 UTC