- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:14:46 -0700
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
A few comments on the editor's draft: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-fonts/#font-variant-numeric-prop 1. Grammar is too loose. The current spec specifies # <numeric-values> = [lining-nums | oldstyle-nums | proportional-nums | tabular-nums # | diagonal-fractions | stacked-fractions | slashed-zero]+ But some of these pairs are mutually exclusive, and there's no reason any one keyword should be specified more than once. The grammar should be | <numeric-values> = [ lining-nums | oldstyle-nums ] || [ proportional-nums | tabular-nums ] | || [ diagonal-fractions | stacked-fractions ] || slashed-zero This makes the following sentence redundant: # The values ‘lining-nums’ and ‘oldstyle-nums’ are mutually exclusive, # as are ‘proportional-nums’ and ‘tabular-nums’, ‘diagonal-fractions’ # and ‘stacked-fractions’. It should therefore be removed. 2. Keyword definitions too terse. a) Several of these terms have reasonably-common alternatives, which should be added in parentheses so that people looking for this feature can find and recognize it easily. b) It might be useful to give a little more explanation of what they mean. E.g., explain what distinguishes a lining number from an oldstyle number. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2010 05:15:21 UTC