- From: Chris Lilley via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 01:09:11 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Thanks for the PR and test. > Defer to css-text for optional ligature definition. Do you mean [this wording](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-3/#letter-spacing-property): > When the effective spacing between two characters is not zero (due to either justification or a non-zero value of letter-spacing), user agents **should not** apply optional ligatures, i.e. those that are not defined as required for fundamentally correct glyph shaping or [this non-normative note](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-3/#letter-spacing-property)? > Note: In OpenType, required ligatures are expected to be associated to the rlig feature. All other ligatures are therefore considered optional. In some cases, however, UA or platform heuristics apply additional ligatures in order to handle broken fonts; this specification does not define or override such exceptional handling. I agree that optional, rather than just common, ligatures is correct here. Oh - the ipr bot is complaining, could you [link your GitHub account with your W3C account](https://labs.w3.org/repo-manager/pr/id/w3c/csswg-drafts/3430) please? -- GitHub Notification of comment by svgeesus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/3430#issuecomment-446423200 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2018 01:09:12 UTC