W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2013

Re: [css-fonts] Simplify the syntax definitions of @font-face and @font-feature-values

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 21:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <577042516.17491921.1369368888971.JavaMail.root@mozilla.com>

Tab Atkins wrote:

> It depends on Syntax as much as property grammars depend on Values -
> not really at all, the given spec is just a convenient place to put
> the definitions.

Um, "a convenient place to put the definitions" and their precise 
definition is the very essense of "dependence"!!

> > Revision 2:
> >
> >> > @font-feature-values <'font-family'># { <rule-list> }
> >>
> >> Sorry, mistake from an earlier edit.  I meant:
> >>
> >> @font-feature-values <'font-family'> { <rule-list> }
> >
> > No, this doesn't work because generics can't be included and those
> > would be included in <'font-family'>.
> I don't see any such restriction in the spec - the token grammar just
> uses font_family_list, and the paragraph following says it "uses the
> same syntax as that used for the ‘font-family’ property".

Look more carefully:

    Only named font families are allowed for <font-family>, rules
    that include generic or system fonts in the list of font
    families are considered syntax errors and the contents of the
    rules are ignored.

That said, I should probably move that sentence so that it's closer
to the syntax.

> In any case, that's a trivial fix (and the reason for the edit that
> caused the initial screwup) - just use <family-name># instead of
> <'font-family'>.



John Daggett
Received on Friday, 24 May 2013 04:15:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:30 UTC