- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:02:07 +0900
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 06/13/2013 09:34 AM, Koji Ishii wrote: > I'd like to keep the current behavior as written in the spec. > > I understand there're needs for several variations, but for this level, > I'd like us to pick one behavior that is common, the most reasonable, > the least problematic, and the most wide range of people accepts, > even though it may not necessarily be the best for a segment of > people. We've been discussing to find such one for years by talking > to several parties, and the current behavior is the one all agreed > most reasonable. > > There may be more findings than we had before, I'm a bit curious on > that point, but what I found before was that, in general, uses/authors/ >publishers segments generally want to avoid conflicts. Printing and > typographer segments don't care much of conflicts. Rather, they > prefer conflicts than unexpected automatic behavior, but it is merely > to find and fix errors easily. Either way, conflicts must be resolved > before readers see the documents. > > Given that, if we'd pick one default for this level, I think we should > avoid conflicts. It may make some of professionals's tasks harder, > but still doable, and it is acceptable for much wider stakeholders. > > In terms of picking up 1/N glyphs, again, I'd like to keep the current > definition--which is, undefined. We had this discussion before if I > remember correctly, we actually had some words to specify the > behavior in the spec, but removed them since there were some > opinions including ones from implementers preferring it be left > undefined. It allows implementations to use smarter technologies > such as multiple master or iType. We may find even better logic > after implementations. I can't find good reasons to revert the > consensus at this point. Okay, this works for me. :) I agree with all of your arguments. > they prefer conflicts than unexpected automatic behavior, > but it is merely to find and fix errors easily. Either way, conflicts > must be resolved before readers see the documents. I think this is an important point. Thanks. ~fantasai
Received on Friday, 14 June 2013 10:02:35 UTC