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

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-fonts] Specify what generic font family maps to nastaliq (#4397)

From: Henri Sivonen via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 08:12:36 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-544401072-1571645555-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@shervinafshar
> Possibly, but so are Kufi and Naskh with more immediate and widespread use-cases.

When filing this, I assumed it to be non-controversial that CSS `sans-serif` and `serif` would map to Kufi and Naskh, respectively. (The spec says this explicitly for Naskh but not for Kufi.)

@jfkthame 
> ISTM it would be appropriate for a UA to map the `serif` and/or `sans-serif` generics to Nastaliq faces in the case where the script is Arabic and the content language is tagged as Urdu, or other languages that are known to prefer this style (e.g. Punjabi, Saraiki, Balochi, Pashto -- the latter two perhaps only when the region is Pakistan, I'm not sure of the conventions in Iran or Afghanistan).

That may well be better, and the phrasing of this issue as filed is over-constrained by suggesting that a generic font family be the mechanism.

The background of filing this issue was that I heard an anecdote (and believed it considering that Windows 10 treats "Arabic" and "Arabic (Nastaliq variant)" as different font management groups) in Noto PR video that some Urdu sites preferred bitmapping their text over having a browser use its usual Arabic font. That seemed like an unfortunate situation, so I checked what CSS says about getting Nastaliq (other than `@font-face`), and saw it said nothing. (So that's the "see something, file something" level of this issue.)

I am not suggesting standardizing keywords for all Arabic-script font styles or font styles generally. However, Windows 10 treating, in font management UI, "Arabic" and "Arabic (Nastaliq variant)" on the same level of distinction as "Chinese (Simplified)" and "Chinese (Traditional)" suggested that Nastaliq has special status compared to font styles in general, so it seemed worthwhile for CSS to say how to get it generically. I have no personal experience to evaluate this further.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by hsivonen
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4397#issuecomment-544401072 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 21 October 2019 08:12:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:55 UTC