- From: Sergey Malkin <sergeym@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:12:43 +0000
- To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- CC: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, www-font <www-font@w3.org>, Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
John Daggett wrote: > The problem with allowing "fallback to a font family that has real italics" is that > it doesn't work for scripts that typically lack italics (e.g. Japanese). This is not problem of CSS Fonts module at all . Keyword here is 'script'. Do you homework. Understand what is used for emphasis for language used on the page and _if_ you need italic , use italic font. Only now you decide which font it will be. Sergey Malkin wrote : > If such option is introduced, I see need for three values: allow > synthetic styles, use specified face without faux style, or fallback I started this sentence with "if", which does not mean I support existence of such option. This only means that if it exists, it has to include all three options. I prefer Web designer to pay attention to what is going on with site being developed. If this is done, situations with unintended simulated styles will be more like emergency fallback not worse than accidental fallback to system fonts because of unexpected characters. Current spec gives you power to implement that. Thanks, Sergey
Received on Wednesday, 15 September 2010 14:14:12 UTC