- From: Yasuo Kida （木田泰夫） via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 09:37:47 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
I think it is worth considering adding established typeface categories from each script. This possibility opens up if you accept that generic fonts do not need to match a font. What is frustrating with a font system is that you need to know names. Say I want to use a rounded sans-serif typeface (or kai or whatever typeface category). What’s in front of me is a long list of font names installed on my platform. Sometimes font names contain their style category but not always. I need to go through names one by one to see which is rounded sans. I found a few and picked up one of them but not very confident if it was the most standard one that I wanted. Anyhow I can now copy the name (which name?) and paste it to my css. It is really great if I can just say “rounded”. I think the generic font family can be a way to provide a map to the chaos of font names. Using specific font names has an advantage that you can get the exact style that you know. It at the same time has several disadvantages: - You need to know which fonts are available on each platform and language that you are dealing with. Finding them can be tricky because fonts on even single platform can vary depending on the package, the region, and the version. - Minor platforms suffer. Even if they have Kai, for example, unless you know the platform and its font list, it does not exist for the web. - Platform makers do drop fonts once in a while. This is particularly a problem when you want your pages to live long once after it was created. - Web pages can’t take advantage of new and better fonts even if they are added to the platform. -- GitHub Notification of comment by kidayasuo Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4910#issuecomment-619351373 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 25 April 2020 09:37:49 UTC