- From: Chris Lilley via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2023 15:22:32 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@amelia: > If there is a decision to support a wider array of "generic" stylistic terms, we should probably start talking about using a functional notation (like `style(nastaliq)` or similar). Every new generic keyword risks a compat problem with existing content that used the same keyword as an unquoted font-family name. The spec [now defines](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts-4/#generic-family-name-syntax) a `generic(ident)` syntax which will be used for newly-introduced, and especially for script-specific, generics. We now have [`generic(fangsong)`](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts-4/#fangsong-def) as the first such example. -- GitHub Notification of comment by svgeesus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4397#issuecomment-1749124499 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 5 October 2023 15:22:34 UTC