W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > February 2019

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-fonts] Suggest allowing a list of font-family values in @font-face (#3691)

From: Mike Bremford via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 16:38:23 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-468343137-1551371902-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
I _knew_ I should have gone with the localization option. Much stronger argument :-)

I completely agree with everything you're saying.

But, there's an element of trying to protect the user from themselves here. Fonts sometimes have multiple names - localization is the obvious one, but there are undoubtedly others. Is it "ZapfChancery" or "Zapf Chancery"? "Courier" or "Courier New"? Why should I have to pick one?

Even without this change I can still do
```
@font-face {
    font-family: "Noto Sans Blk";
    font-weight: 900;
    url(NotoSans-Black.ttf);
}
@font-face {
    font-family: "Noto Sans";
    font-weight: 900;
    url(NotoSans-Black.ttf);
}
```
to reference the same font with two different names. What I'm proposing is - essentially - some syntactic sugar to make this unnecessary verbosity go away. 

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by faceless2
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3691#issuecomment-468343137 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2019 16:38:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:44 UTC