Re: [css3-fonts] revised definition of font-family

Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> >  As with other user-defined identifiers, reserved keywords such as
> >  'inherit', 'initial' or 'default' are not permitted within
> >  unquoted font family names.  The use of these within unquoted
> >  family names must be treated as invalid, so font family names
> >  containing these keywords must be quoted.
> 
> I think this would read better as a note. It doesn't actually
> express any new conformance requirements, it's just pointing out
> existing requirements from other specs.  Maybe something like:
> 
> "Note: The global reserved keywords (currently 'inherit', 'initial',
> and 'default', see V&U for details) are not valid user-defined
> identifiers; attempting to use one of them will either make the
> property invalid or accidentally invoke the special behavior those
> keywords represent.  If a font's name actually includes one of those
> words, specify it as a string instead.

During the F2F, Bert stated that he thought this was a change from
CSS 2.1, that unquoted font family names like 'foo inherit' should
not be rejected as invalid.  I don't really feel strongly either way
but I'm wondering if you see a strong reason to make the use of any
keyword within a multi-word font family name invalid.

Regards,

John Daggett

Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 07:56:20 UTC