Re: CSS fonts only?

On 20/03/2008, Christopher Fynn <cfynn gmx net> wrote:
>  > The OT 1.5 specifications added two more nameID to support these
>  > non-CSS variants, or non-weight-width-slope (non-WWS) variants, to
>  > make it easier by splitting them into different font families. But
>  > that will only take place in future fonts. People need to be able to
>  > use today's fonts today.
> "Caption", "Heading", "Display" - these sound like names for optical variants
>  designed for use at different output sizes. Something like: Caption = small
>  text, Heading = large text, Display = x-large text.
>  Variants like "Bubble"  would need to be defined in some meaningful way. Do such
>  exotic variants actually need treating as variants - rather than as completly
>  separate fonts?

The WWS nameID shows it should be separate. Only variation in weight,
width and slope should be in the same font.

Denis Moyogo Jacquerye

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]