- From: jfkthame via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 11:03:17 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> I suspect that on macOS, iOS, and Android, it's pretty clear. The OSes have one set of built-in fonts (which does vary per version though), and anything else is user-installed. Even on macOS, I'm not sure this is quite so clear. There are a number of fonts that are shipped with macOS but are not exposed in the standard collection seen when applications request "the list of available font families" from the OS. Some of these are associated with particular applications (iWork, iLife), and can probably be ignored here, but there are also a bunch of fonts for "language support" (basically a collection of Noto fonts); should these be auto-exposed? (FWIW, Firefox currently *does* make the "language support" fonts available in the browser, even though they don't appear in other applications' font lists.) And then there are downloadable fonts: there are a number of font families (mostly, though not exclusively, CJK fonts) that are not installed by default (at least on my US English configuration), but are known to the OS and can be "enabled" (downloaded) directly within Font Book, without following the usual font installation route. Are these considered "system" or "user"-installed? On Android, it's also less than clear, I think: in my experience, many device manufacturers or distributors customize the collection of fonts they ship, so that there is not a uniform set of fonts per Android version (unless we interpret "version" here to encompass not only the Android version number but also the specific device on which it's running). -- GitHub Notification of comment by jfkthame Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4497#issuecomment-564960055 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 12 December 2019 11:04:43 UTC