Re: Tests with embedding, including of font resource with a @font-face rule

On 2017-02-16 17:22, Gérard Talbot wrote:
> We have a bunch of tests, scattered in several test suites, which 
> require a special, unique font (besides Ahem font) to use, to declare 
> in such tests. I am trying to find the best way to declare @font-face 
> in those tests. 

Assume woff 1.0 support and just link to that, because all browsers 
under test will support it. Don't use a local font, because you don't 
know it is the same font and same version.
> Right now, there is no guidelines that we are all following. I would 
> like this to be standardized, normalized. We could therefore remove, 
> drop use of the font flag (I can not remember if the font flag is 
> supposed to be removed anyway from now on).
If the test uses @font-face then it doesn't need the font flag.
> Is declaring the .woff equivalent sufficient? I do not think so,
why not?
> furthermore if the .woff filesize is rather big.
So? If that is the size of the font the test requires, so be it.
If that is a concern though, link to a woff2 as first choice with woff 
1.0 as the fallback. Ensure these two are identical (made from the same 
ttf or otf).

> Here's what I propose, in a real test
> , involving a font face that we are already using in a dozen tests:
>   @font-face
>     {
>       font-family: "M+ 1p";
>       src: local("M+ 1p") , /* first try to use locally available and 
> installed M+ 1p font */
I suggest not using a local font (unless that is the specific purpose of 
the test)
> url("support/mplus-1p-regular.woff") format("woff") , /* otherwise 
> download its woff equivalent */
> url("support/mplus-1p-regular.ttf") format ("truetype") ; /* otherwise 
> use its TrueType font */

>       /* filesize of mplus-1p-regular.woff: 803300 bytes (784.5 
> KiloBytes) */
>       /* filesize of mplus-1p-regular.ttf : 1571848 bytes (1.5 
> MegaBytes) */
>       /*
>       mplus-1p-regular.ttf can be downloaded at, from
>       */
That sort of metadata should be in the woff.

Also, to be clear, that extensive commenting was by way of discussion in 
this thread and not an example to follow for new tests?

Chris Lilley
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media

Received on Friday, 17 February 2017 18:16:24 UTC