c525-font-wt-000.htm and extensive, thorough font-weight testing

>>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20100815/html4/c525-font-wt-000.htm
>>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20100815/html4/c527-font-10.htm
>>> This assumes that there is a "very light" weight available for the
>>> default font or that a tester knows which faces are available and
>>> that using the lightest one is fine
>> Regarding that c525-font-wt-000.htm test, one idea would be to provide
>> a
>> link of downloadable fonts (which should be useful or recommendable)
>> for
>> the test.
> I guess so. Others do already ('font' metadata flag).
>> Another idea is to make the text font-size much bigger (say 64px) to
>> give the tester an honest chance to better see and compare. When using
>> DejaVu Sans font face and with a big font-size, I can see that some
>> browsers fail that test ... (or that the test is not correct? I
>> haven't
>> examined the test...it's not a simple one)
> I can't spot any obvious differences between browsers here (Ubuntu and
> Windows XP).
> Big text won't help with the fact that the "very light" text won't be
> any
> lighter than "normal" if the appropriate font variant doesn't exist.

"if the appropriate font variant doesn't exist.": you are correct.

I assume here that the tester is already using a font (we would
recommend) capable of rendering the appropriate font variants, capable
of rendering various font-weights as in that c525-font-wt-000.htm test .

That c525-font-wt-000.htm testcase tests nuances, steps of font weight
(100, 300, 500, 700, 900 and normal is supposed to be 400): with a 16px
default font-size, that is definitely not big enough for such variations
of glyph emboldening.

> For
> instance, I don't seem to have the Extralight style of DejaVu Sans

The full DejaVu fonts family contains following styles:

    * Sans: Book, Bold, Oblique, Bold Oblique, Condensed, Condensed
Bold, Condensed Oblique and Condensed Bold Oblique, Extralight

> (and
> in
> either case the test defaults to other families in the browsers I
> tried).

The default font for the test is a thing/issue which I believe can be
worked out.

regards, Gérard
Contributions to the CSS 2.1 test suite:

CSS 2.1 test suite (beta 3; August 15th 2010):

CSS 2.1 test suite contributors:

Received on Saturday, 11 September 2010 00:41:46 UTC