W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2014

Re: [css-fonts] selecting color or monochrome glyphs for emoji fonts

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:01:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDAcntT0k7V2CZ=GUNU_3qZhgntt1VyXRCAepKcDQZX8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@google.com>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, public-webfonts-wg <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote:
> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> This seems easily addressable, if browsers are willing, by changing
>> 'color' to accept a comma-separated list of values, which are used by
>> multi-color glyphs in some defined order.
>
> I think I would prefer this to be at least partly defined in the
> @font-face rule, since the palette entries between different fonts are
> going to be entirely incompatible, and it wouldn't be great if you end
> up getting a font other than the one you expect.
>
> So something like the following what I've been imagining. I thought I
> had sent this to the list already but perhaps not.
>
> @font-palette FancyPalette {
>   highlight: 0;
>   shadow: 1;
>   ornaments: 2;
> }
>
> @font-face {
>   font-family: Fancy;
>   src: url(MyFancyFont.woff);
>   font-palette: FancyPalette;
> }
>
> h1 {
>   font-family: Fancy;
>   font-palette: highlight red, ornaments blue, shadow rgba(10, 20, 30, 0.5);
> }

Yes, something like that would work, with 'font-palette' having an
initial value that uses 'color' for everything instead.

And no, you hadn't sent this to the list.  Please do so, as I have
some feedback on it. ^_^

~TJ
Received on Friday, 22 August 2014 00:02:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:45 UTC