- From: Sebastian Zartner <sebastianzartner@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 08:09:44 +0200
- To: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>
- Cc: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>, Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On 15 July 2015 at 00:54, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote: > > On 15 Jul 2015, at 8:47 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote: >> >> > On 15 Jul 2015, at 7:42 AM, Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> wrote: >> > >> > Wouldn't your "system" be equivalent to or duplicative of one or more of >> > the >> > 6 existing "system" fonts on http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-fonts/#font-prop >> > , >> > e.g. menu? >> >> This whole thing is weird. It makes specifying fallback font-families >> strange - you now move them to the font shorthand. >> >> Even though you can then override size/weight/etc after the shorthand, it >> seems yucky that you have to use a shorthand just to get what is effectively >> a font-family. > > > Per David's email, don't you also need a way to set font size/weight etc to > values that match system usage? And isn't the 'font' property the best way > to do this? > > > Not at this point. Or, more accurately, not with this proposal. We just want > to match the family. FWIW that would be easily doable by allowing to set the new keyword on the other longhands like font-size, font-weight, font-style, etc. Sebastian
Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2015 06:10:31 UTC