Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-fonts] @font-face src: url() format() keywords vs. strings ambiguous in spec (#6328)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-fonts] @font-face src: url() format() keywords vs. strings ambiguous in spec`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: format() serializes with strings`
* `RESOLVED: format() serializes with strings`
* `RESOLVED: font/ MIME type registry manages valid values of format()`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;fantasai> Topic: [css-fonts] @font-face src: url() format() keywords vs. strings ambiguous in spec<br>
&lt;fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6328<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: Grammar here is complicated due to allowing strings and keywords<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: but most compatible form is string<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: so we should support string and serialize as string<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: do we want to accept keywords as well?<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: let's split into 2 questions, first is resolving on serializing as strings because they are the most backwards-compatible syntax<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: does drott have any concerns?<br>
&lt;fantasai> ...<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: most backwards-compat usually winning argument<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: format() serializes with strings<br>
&lt;fantasai> jfkthame: What are we intending to do with font-technology(), will that take keywords or strings, and will that be confusing?<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: That will take keywords as currently specced. Though that can change.<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: There's no back-compat concern with technology()<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: Since we have back-compat issue with one, maybe all of them should serialize as strings<br>
&lt;fantasai> jfkthame: I'm not sure what I favor<br>
&lt;fantasai> jfkthame: I recognize the back-compat issue<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: let's take that as a separate issue<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: and resolve to use strings for format() and then find out whether drott agrees, or whether we can do something more complicated, and if string serialization format sticks can decide on consistency for rest<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: any other concerns about serializing format() with strings?<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: format() serializes with strings<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: There weren't font MIME types at IANA, so we faked it by creating our own names<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: now there is a fonts/ registry for MIME types<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: fantasai suggested that we just use that registry<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: but the RFC says that it is informative, and css-fonts-3 is normative<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: I think we'd like to change that so that they are normative, and we are informative, and they can handle registration of new formats so we don't have to<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: So we would normatively refer to their spec?<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: And then errata the RFC so that it no longer says our spec is normative<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: ...<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: Shouldn't have different keywords allowed between string or keyword in format()<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: font/ MIME type registry manages valid values of format()<br>
&lt;fantasai> ??: What's involved in getting IETF updated?<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: I will contact the chair and ask if this is in scope of errata or not<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: Unsure if publish a new RFC or not<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: if errata, then errata submission form<br>
&lt;astearns> s/??/PeterConstable/<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: if not then will need to spin up a very small wg to make the change<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: but anyway I'll deal with it<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: Last thing is whether we accept unquoted keywords<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: Does any implementation currently accept keywords for format()?<br>
&lt;fantasai> jfkthame: IIRC webkit does, but haven't checked<br>
&lt;fantasai> chris_: And do we want to continue to allow that and allow other browsers to do so, or get them to fix that?<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: out of time, so let's leave issue open on this question and ask for feedback<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6328#issuecomment-971823790 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Wednesday, 17 November 2021 18:00:43 UTC