- From: Chris Lilley via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 15:27:30 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Font tech features are dependent on the font format. We do have multiple formats which are effectively interchangeable wrappers right now, and for those the wrapper format and feature tech are independent queries, but this isn't true in consideration of all font formats past and future. That isn't really true currently, which makes it a poor fit for `format`. Agreed [in the past](https://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-css3-webfonts-20020802/#referencing) there were - "speedo" - "intellifont" - "truedoc-pfr" - "SVG" and of course we can't predict what may happen more than a few years into the future, but currently in font format terms everything is an `sfnt` which could be called either TrueType or OpenType. And (also stuffed into format) there may be compression/transfer tech on top (WOFF|WOFF2|IFT) but that does not alter the font technologies available, it just compresses or subsets them. That said I don't object to renaming `font-technology()` to `font-format()` if that is what works and we agree on. But it makes things less clear. -- GitHub Notification of comment by svgeesus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6520#issuecomment-936498641 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2021 15:27:33 UTC