- From: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 00:52:18 +0000
- To: "jpierreq@laposte.net" <jpierreq@laposte.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 3/31/16, 4:10 PM, "jpierreq@laposte.net" <jpierreq@laposte.net> wrote: >Authors who want to display the numbers inside the element F in proportional form and with the same figures than his ancestor E should repeat the <numeric-figure-value> of E in the rule that sets the font-variant-numeric property for F. They may be tempted to avoid this repetition with the font-feature-settings property; in this case a repetion would be necessary to display the element of class .fraction as a stacked fraction, with the same numeric spacing than his ancestor F and the same figures than the ancestor E of F. > >That could be done easily if font-variant-numeric were a shorthand for the five properties : >font-variant-numeric-figure, >font-variant-numeric-spacing, >font-variant-numeric-fraction, >font-variant-numeric-ordinal, >and font-variant-numeric-slashed-zero. > >These properties could be used in the same logic established since CSS1 with, for example, font-style and font-weight : there is no need to know if an element is bold for some reason to write the rule that displays some of his decendants in italic for another reason. > >E { font-variant-numeric-figure: old-style-num; >} /* subjective aesthetic choice */ >F { font-variant-numeric-spacing: proportional-nums; >} /* because F does not contain tabular data */ >..fraction { font-variant-numeric-fraction: stacked-fraction; >} /* just because it's a fraction (not a date) */ > >Since authors would have no need to repeat themselves, they would not have the temptation to avoid repetitions by using the font-feature-settings property which is not entended for that. > >font-variant-numeric-figure, font-variant-numeric-spacing, font-variant-numeric-fraction are not properties of the fonts module, but their syntax are already explained as <numeric-figure-vales>, <numeric-spacing-values>, <numeric-fraction-values>. > >Similarily, >font-variant-alternates may be a shorthand for : >font-variant-alternates-stylistic, font-variant-alternates-historical-forms, font-variant-alternates-styleset, font-variant-alternates-character-variant, font-variant-alternates-swash, font-variant-alternates-ornaments and font-variant-alternates-annotation; >font-variant-east-asian, a shorthand for : >font-variant-east-asian-variant, font-variant-east-asian-width and font-variant-east-asian-ruby; >and font-variant-ligatures, a shorthand for : >font-variant-ligatures-common-lig, font-variant-ligatures-discretionary-lig, font-variant-ligatures-historical-lig and font-variant-ligatures-contextual-alt. I think this is an interesting proposal. But I would want to see data on actual use (showing either the repetition or the misuse of font-feature-settings) before we decide on adding new shorthands. Support for all of these properties in multiple browsers is relatively new - we can probably wait a bit to find out if more grouping is required. Thanks, Alan
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2016 00:52:47 UTC