On 15 Aug 2010, at 15:49, John Daggett wrote: > Thomas Phinney wrote: > >> Synthesized stuff (or transformations) are not the same as designed >> condensed or extended fonts. I would ask two things: >> >> - that you do not *encourage* agents to synthesize font-stretch >> ("allow" is okay I guess, though you should understand the results >> will always be crap) >> >> - that for any agent that does do synthetic stretch, it is OFF by >> default and turned on by some additional flag or option. > > I agree, I think any stretchy/squishy text effects should be in done via > properties separate from the font selection process, properties clearly > defined with testable behavior. Selecting a font should be different > from applying an effect. Ok, that seems fair enough. It's a pity "font-stretch" is taken for the font selection property ("font-width" might have been better?), but it's much too late to change that, no doubt. In that case, I suggest we should have a new property called "font-extend" that would take a scaling factor to be applied to the glyphs and metrics in the x-direction (or rather, along the direction of text layout, so for vertical text it would apply in the y-direction). A font-extend value of less than 1.0 would actually compress the glyphs, of course. And negative values ought to reflect the glyphs and reverse the text direction, so that <span style="font-extend: -1.0">mirror writing</span> becomes easy to express. Suggestions of better names are welcome. JKReceived on Tuesday, 17 August 2010 09:13:29 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:49:46 UTC