- From: Dominik Röttsches via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 12:46:15 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> here are we on **Lack of algorithmic description or precise outcomes**, do you have a concrete and testable suggestion here? Did you mean to ask "where are we...?"? I find the wording: > "This property is expected to affect font fallback; however, the exact nature of the interaction of font fallback with [font-variant-emoji](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts-4/#propdef-font-variant-emoji) is explicitly unspecified." too broad and I think we otherwise already have tighter rules in the [5.3 cluster matching section](https://www.w3.org/TR/css-fonts-4/#cluster-matching), which @shivamidow also points out. What I established in the comments above from UAX 29 is that the variation selectors belong to the clusters according to Unicode cluster rules and we specify cluster matching as an addition to fallback in the specification. (The integration of cluster matching with fallback and font matching algorithm could be improved in the spec, as a side note). So IMHO a good outcome would be if we could lift the requirements here to saying something like: The property causes font fallback to behave as if the respective VS was intended (as in the values description), then font fallback, including the cluster fallback rules is performed, which must take the presentation preference / "appended" variation selectors into account. -- GitHub Notification of comment by drott Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9291#issuecomment-1727656786 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2023 12:46:17 UTC