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

Re: [css-fonts] Issues with font matching algorithm when weights are missing

From: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2014 21:43:13 +0000
Message-ID: <54A07971.4090003@gmail.com>
To: Lea Verou <lea@verou.me>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
CC: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
On 28/12/14 18:12, Lea Verou wrote:
> The font matching algorithm outlined in [1] results in cases of very
> odd matching when it comes to missing font weights and it should be
> changed. For example, if the requested font weight is 100 (extra
> light) and only 900 is available (which is black) or vice versa, this
> one will be used instead of falling back to the next family in the
> font stack. When the difference between desired and available weights
> is so dramatic, falling back would be a more appropriate choice in
> most cases.
> This issue was brought to my attention when a colleague sent me [2],
> asking why the different behavior between Firefox & Chrome. Upon
> further investigation, it appeared that he only had UltraBold for
> Gill Sans and Chrome used that for all weights to avoid falling back
> to Gill Sans MT. One would expect that Chrome’s behavior is the buggy
> one here, but according to the existing algorithm [2], Chrome is
> perfectly correct and Firefox is buggy!

There's considerable discussion of this case in the bug that introduced 
this behavior in Firefox:

Received on Sunday, 28 December 2014 21:43:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:46 UTC