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

The inconsistencies certainly give me pause in implementing this resolution. Specifically we would at minimum need to add `ttf` and `otf` as aliases, which has no author benefit. 

I'm also unsure what to do with legacy formats (the `application/vnd.ms-fontobject` registration explicitly says "specification: none" which is not strictly true but we certainly don't want to encourage use of EOT.  TrueDoc Portable Font Resource is also super-legacy (and is in the standards tree not the vendor tree, I think some MPEG system required it in the distant past). And SVG fonts (actual SVG, not SVG-in-OpenType) also don't fit the pattern. In general I think, based on zero or near-zero usage, it is fine for Fonts 4 to be silent on those formats.

Adding an `Internet Media Type` column to the [table of font formats](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts-4/#font-format-definitions) in Fonts 4 would at least help with alignment and might be useful.

But probably we should revisit that resolution. Apologis for forgetting about the inconsistencies.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by svgeesus
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6328#issuecomment-974053680 using your GitHub account


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

Received on Friday, 19 November 2021 13:04:23 UTC