- From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:10:54 +0100
- To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Le 28/01/2013 01:41, John Daggett a écrit : >> The point of my email was that <family-name> (that is, a non-generic >> name) is not as well defined as <generic-family>. It’s said to be >> case-insensitive, but not what kind. The part of css3-values about >> pre-defined keywords applies to <generic-family> but not >> <family-name>. > Thanks for bringing this up Simon, I think it's an important case to > consider. As Tab says, I think we should consider it after making a > clear decision on how user-defined identifiers are handled. But I > think the answer is somewhat subtle, which is the point I'm guessing > you were wondering about. > > The value of the 'font-family' property can contain (1) a font family > name intended to match a platform font family or (2) an author-defined > font family name used in @font-face rules or (3) a generic family. > This makes it somewhat like the predefined vs. user-defined counter > name case but with one important distinction - font family names can > be matched using a localized name (e.g. "ヒラギノ角ゴ ProN"), something > that is not user-defined. (3) is covered by §3.1. "Pre-defined Keywords" of css3-values. (The current draft says ASCII CI.) (2) is matching font-family properties with font-family descriptors of @font-face rules. Both are under the UA’s control, so it makes sense to use the same rules as other user-defined identifiers. (Whatever these rules end up being.) (1) is, as you say, more subtle. I don’t know much about font subsystems. Are UAs expected to get a list of all fonts available on the system, all variants of their family names, and do the matching themselves? > In this case I think Unicode caseless matching *is* appropriate (i.e. > C+F rules, no normalization or locale-dependent matching rules) and, > as such, needs to be defined somewhere explicitly so other specs can > reference it. As with all CSS keywords, generic keywords should > however be matched using ASCII case insensitive matching (i.e. silly > things like a name containing a long-S in 'sans-serif' shouldn't > match). Some will groan that this is terribly inconsistent but for > authors I doubt this matters - generic keywords will match as they > always have and localized family names (which many browsers don't > support properly today) will be handled consistently. -- Simon Sapin
Received on Monday, 28 January 2013 11:11:18 UTC