- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 02:14:18 -0700
- To: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
- CC: www-style <www-style@w3.org>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>
On 09/18/2010 01:21 AM, Christoph Päper wrote: > fantasai: >> On 09/17/2010 09:55 AM, Christopher Slye wrote: >> >> [@font-feature-values<font-family>] maps to exactly the same thing as the >> <font-family> in the 'font-family' property. >> >>> Can<value-name> be shared? Can I define 'swash: swishy 1' for FontFamilyOne >>> and 'swash: swishy 3' for FontFamilyTwo, then use 'swash(swishy)' to access >>> the alternates in both families? >> >> Yes. That's exactly the point of this proposal. :) > > Does that mean that all resources in one ‘src’ would have to use equivalent > integer values? Hmm, that's a good point. If a font-family is made up of multiple fonts that are not consistent in their use of integer values, then there is a problem. However, this should only happen if you're building up an @font-face family using unrelated font faces, and in that case you might be better off keeping them as separate font families and using the standard fallback list font-family: MS Mincho, Bitstream Cyberbit; rather than trying to combine unrelated fonts into a single named family. jdaggett might have more comments on this... ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 27 September 2010 09:14:58 UTC