- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 08:31:57 -0700
- To: Andrey Mikhalev <amikhal@abisoft.spb.ru>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Wednesday 2008-06-11 17:07 +0400, Andrey Mikhalev wrote: > imo both cases do not achieve desired effect, i.e. prevent weight > inversion on font-family swing. > if you won't bother with it, just return back to pretty simple CSS2 > definition. So you're saying you actually know what the CSS2 definition says should happen in these cases? As far as I can tell it's self-contradictory (or maybe ambiguous). > and i think w/o 'used font-family' thing on computation stage you cannot > solve the problem; then no reason to keep neither sequence nor count of > relative values. > so, why particular [weird?] impl must be freezed in spec? Which 'used font-family'? There are more than one. -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Wednesday, 11 June 2008 15:32:45 UTC