- From: Adam Prescott <adam@aprescott.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 22:05:20 +0000
- To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 5 March 2013 02:34, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com> wrote: > I also think you're missing a key point about local(), it refers to a > *single* face, not a font family (e.g. "Helvetica", "Helvetica Bold", > "Helvetica Italic", etc.). Whatever you propose you need to sketch it > out for a font family, not just a single face. I realise that. :) I never assumed any changes to the way @font-face works, other than to allow composing even without a src property in one rule, but where the value of font-family matches. I don't think what I'm suggesting would affect fonts vs font families. The feature request to Google (and all other third-party hosts) wouldn't just be to support unicode-range, though, would it? I still wouldn't be able to reference one web font when defining another in a @font-face rule, so there'd still be no way to override. The only way is when my overriding @font-face can have a src value.
Received on Tuesday, 5 March 2013 22:06:13 UTC