- From: Myles C. Maxfield via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 21:15:32 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
litherum has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == font-palette:light and font-palette:dark are a bit disingenuous == The font [can indicate](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/opentype/spec/cpal#palette-type-array) certain palettes as `USABLE_WITH_LIGHT_BACKGROUND` or `USABLE_WITH_DARK_BACKGROUND`. CSS [says](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts-4/#font-palette-prop): > light: Some color font formats include metadata marking certain palettes as applicable on a light (close to white) background. This keyword causes the user-agent to use the first available palette in the font file marked this way. However, a palette that is usable on a light background will probably involve dark colors. Therefore, when you say `font-palette: light` you are usually actually specifying a color palette whose colors are _dark_. Switching the meaning of `light` and `dark` is probably not the right solution, though. Maybe we should just copy the names from OpenType and rename `light` to `usable-with-light-background`? Or `usable-with-background(light)`? Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7048 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 14 February 2022 21:15:34 UTC