- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 13:25:01 -0800
- To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>, Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>
On Feb 25, 2010, at 12:37 , John Daggett wrote: > > David Singer wrote: >> So, option #5 might be "The requested variant applies to every font in >> the list, if it exists, otherwise it is ignored." ? > > That's default behavior, basically option #1. OK, but that's not what option #1 says. > Option #4 provides a > way of working around this, of tying feature settings to a single > font, but authors are still free to just use the generic property and > not worry about it. > > I think in practical situations this is much harder to imagine than it > would seem, fallback fonts typically fall into the bland, "websafe" > category so the chances of that font having variants is fairly low. > Naturally this could change, websafe fonts could sprout all sorts of > new features but I think it's much more likely that variants are used > with downloadable fonts where option #4 provides a natural solution. Do variations such as lining figures, small caps, or swash italics, fall within this area? If so, I think it not unlikely that some fallback fonts will support those features. David Singer Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Thursday, 25 February 2010 21:25:35 UTC