- From: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
- Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 11:57:03 +0100
- To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
John Daggett: >> normal | inherit | [ <common-lig-values> || <discretionary-lig-values> || <historical-lig-values> || <contextual-alt-values> || stylistic(<feature-value-name>) || historical-forms || styleset(<feature-value-name> [, <feature-value-name>]*) || character-variant(<feature-value-name> [,<feature-value-name>]*) || swash(<feature-value-name>) || ornaments(<feature-value-name>) || annotation(<feature-value-name>) || <caps-value> || <numeric-figure-values> || <numeric-spacing-values> || <numeric-fraction-values> || ordinal || slashed-zero || <east-asian-variant-values> || <east-asian-width-values> || ruby ] > > The trickiness with this is the fact that *some* of the values of various font-variant-xxx subproperties are mutually exclusive and some are not. It’s not like solutions to that problem – which, in my opinion, results from modeling the properties closely to OT features – hadn’t been proposed in the past. Here are two that I suggested: Make the ligation sub-property ‘font-variant-ligatures’ take keywords for the most common cases instead of fine-grained font feature control, which remained available through ‘font-feature-settings’. Similar considerations apply to other ‘font-variant-*’ properties. <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Mar/0049.html> Find keywords for the (now) shorthand property ‘font-variant’, e.g. ‘titling’ and ‘historic’, that are independent of the longhands, but still set them accordingly and thereby cover most frequent scenarios. Shorthand properties don’t have to employ every detail of their longhand properties. Solving common use-cases the easy way is more important than direct high-level access to each and every insignificant feature. <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0192.html>
Received on Monday, 6 February 2012 10:57:44 UTC