- From: Chris Harrelson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 20:27:55 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
As I understand it from re-reading the notes from last week (*), the motivation for superscript/subscript is that font metrics in font files are often wrong (whereas for some of the other font metrics overrides, it's an issue of lack of interop across browsers, or a desire to minimize layout shifts during WebFont loading. If it's just that font metrics in font files are often wrong, would it make more sense to get the fonts themselves fixed rather than adding developer workarounds? Are there certain cases where it is impractical to ever get the fonts fixed? (*) Snippets: fantasai: Briefly, font has metrics on amount to shift up/down for super/subscript and says what size as function of font size. If font provides a glyph it's supposed to provide ones that match. If you don't have glyph UA can synthesize by resizing. In order to get that to match you need metrics and a lot of fonts don't have chrishtr: Is there difference between OS and browsers? fantasai: No, font metrics are frequently wrong <fantasai> chrishtr, see example in https://www.w3.org/TR/css-fonts-4/#font-variant-position-prop Rossen: This is very much related but I would prefer we open a new issue where more thought can be given. fantasai can you open that? fantasai: Yep -- GitHub Notification of comment by chrishtr Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5518#issuecomment-696961184 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2020 20:27:56 UTC