- From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 19:25:33 -0400
- To: "John Daggett" <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- Cc: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
Le Mer 23 mai 2012 12:47, John Daggett a écrit : > (...) The original proposals were > outlined here: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012May/0630.html > Proposed: > Unquoted font family names that happen to be the same as the keyword > values 'inherit', 'default' and 'initial' or the generic font > keywords ('serif', 'sans-serif', 'monospace', 'fantasy', and > 'cursive') do not match the '<family-name>' type. These names must > be quoted to prevent confusion with the keywords with the same > names. Note that 'font-family: Times, inherit' is therefore an > invalid declaration, because 'inherit' in that position can neither > be a valid keyword nor a valid font family name. > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/fonts.html#font-family-prop John, What about the other changes? Are there other changes? Wasn't there supposed to be other changes? Is this the new and approved CSS 2.1 font-family syntax: font-family value: [ <string> | <ident>+ ]# | inherit Is this test http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/font-family-rule-004a.xht still good for CSS 2.1? Thank you, Gérard -- CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011 http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/ Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Wednesday, 23 May 2012 23:26:07 UTC