Friendly-pinging Mike's ping of Rick's suggestion. Is that analysis
something you can spend some time on before we ship this?

-mike


On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 3:34 PM Mike Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:

> (sorry to disappear on PTO for much of this discussion)
>
> +1 to what Rick is suggesting here, the risk is likely low but worth
> spending an hour or two to verify we're not breaking some (non-obviously)
> important usage.
>
> On 11/25/21 10:16 AM, Rick Byers wrote:
>
> Interesting, thanks. If missing glyphs isn't really an issue, then the
> compat risk is much lower. A cosmetic impact that makes a page in Chrome
> look like how it looks in Firefox is IMHO a good thing (helps raise
> awareness of the poor cosmetics without actually preventing usage). So,
> while doing some quick analysis of a few cases sounds like a good idea to
> me just to validate some assumptions here, I wouldn't suggest investing too
> much time into that.
>
> Rick
>
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 5:21 AM Frédéric Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Le 25/11/2021 à 11:12, Frédéric Wang a écrit :
>> >
>> > Thank you Yoav, Rick and Dominik,
>> >
>> > Some random remarks/thoughts:
>> >
>> > 1. First I believe the risk is probably not to have missing characters
>> > : At the end, we actually always do try "-webkit-standard" internally
>> > as a fallback. Instead, the risk is more to have inconsistent fonts
>> > selected (with different style, metrics) for the same text. Say,
>> > MyGenericFont would contain basic CJK or emoji or math characters but
>> > then would lack some more exotic ones which would then be taken by
>> > another MySpecializedFont.
>> >
>> > 2. That said, I can't explain why how " -webkit-standard" would really
>> > guarantee anything against the inconsistent font selected. Maybe
>> > instead this -webkit-standard value is used to to explicitly select a
>> > preferred font per Unicode scripts (on non-Android platforms) or to
>> > resolve CJK scripts specially (on Android).
>> >
>> > 3. My guess is more that these usages are really generated by tools
>> > (as Mike mentioned) not introduced on purpose by authors. Indeed, the
>> > result of using -webkit-standard explicitly is really hard to predict.
>> >
>> One more thought: in Mike's example, we typically have the value alone
>> (without other family names) like "font-family: -webkit-standard". This
>> may suggest it is just used for resetting to default font, but I believe
>> "font-family: initial" would have the same result.
>>
>> --
>> Frédéric Wang
>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "blink-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY9CsRJbP%3DC%3D34MbMGKL3EWTh5ODORnRHN81W7ADSzJy-A%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFUtAY9CsRJbP%3DC%3D34MbMGKL3EWTh5ODORnRHN81W7ADSzJy-A%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "blink-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/45a76684-da7f-7677-9e17-8f1e1441d67d%40chromium.org
> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/45a76684-da7f-7677-9e17-8f1e1441d67d%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAKXHy%3DcPEX98wsJzOYRu%2Bv5JKvhWW1hCnFO%2Bs%3DuEWogpJCt1kw%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to