- From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 01:28:25 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> A fix is necessary as long as only "may" is used there. For Yu Gothic UI v1.93 or below (I don't know its trunk version where Microsoft insists that they fixed the defect), "should" must be used. That seems reasonable to me. Agenda+ to propose doing replacing "may" with "should" in that sentence. However, when it comes to listing specific fonts and specific versions of specific fonts, I'm less sure. The spec doesn't list any specific font on any topic, so starting to do that would be a big decision, maybe considered a change in scope. On the other hand, we might consider starting a registry of "fonts known to have issues", with some description of what's wrong about them and what adjustments browsers might want to make when they run into them. But that's a considerable effort to maintain such a document, and I don't know if would be fair to font vendors / OS vendors / browser vendors if we don't try to have broad and balanced coverage. > Why do you try to force us to warn on this defect in every bug tracker of browsers? This problem has become too well-known as a pitfall. I don't want to force you to do anything, but when you want a bug fixed in browsers, filing a bug on them is the way to go. Adjusting the specification does not solve bugs in browsers, or does it even report them. The specification is not the boss of browsers, the specification is what browsers (and others) agree we are trying to do. I think the suggested fix you proposed is reasonable, but accepting it will not automatically fix or even report bugs in all browsers for every broken font. -- GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11074#issuecomment-3349607309 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2025 01:28:26 UTC