Hi Dominik, Thanks for informing me about the history and conflict between @font-face: size-adjust and font-size-adjust.
Per your comment, I investigated the latest spec document and how Gecko handles the conflict. In a nutshell, the draft spec prioritizes the font-size-adjust over the size-adjust (i.e., overriding) [1], and Gecko follows the rule. The following is the related part of the document. > The font-size-adjust property is applied after the size-adjust descriptor. > NOTE: The consequence of applying font-size-adjust after size-adjust is that > size-adjust appears to have no effect. In addition, I wrote a simple test on jsfiddle.net [2]. Please feel free to test it with your Firefox. I plan to implement the same behavior of Firefox, following the spec document. Best, [1] https://w3c.github.io/csswg-drafts/css-fonts-5/#valdef-ascent-overridedescriptor-percentage [2] https://jsfiddle.net/wfsdagc7/ -- ChangSeok > On Mar 30, 2023, at 12:13 AM, Dominik Röttsches <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi ChangSeok, > > Thanks for working on this. During the development and shipping of the > @font-face size-adjust descriptor we found that at least in our code the > font-size-adjust implementation was not compatible with this change. As > size-adjust was a higher priority then, the font-size-adjust > RuntimeEnabledFeature was downgraded from experimental to test, discussion > during review in this change. > > We have a related TODO in the code that when the size-adjust descriptor is > present in a @font-face, the font-size-adjust property is ignored. Could you > describe how you plan to address this? Could you also investigate how FireFox > handles cases where the size-adjust descriptor and font-size-adjust interact. > Are there any problems arising from the use of both at the same time? > > Dominik > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 9:35 PM ChangSeok Oh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mar 28, 2023, at 6:29 AM, David Baron <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 6:33 PM ChangSeok Oh <[email protected]> wrote: > > Interoperability and Compatibility > > > > Gecko: Publicly support > > > > WebKit: Positive and in development > > https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=254191 > > https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/pull/11744 (I am the author) > > > > Web developers: No signals > > > > Other signals: > > > > WebView application risks > > No known risks > > > > It might be useful to separately describe (for some or all of these > > sources) support for the 1-value syntax (CSS 2.1, css-fonts-3, css-fonts-4) > > and support for the 2-value syntax (css-fonts-5). For example, according > > to MDN, Gecko has been shipping the 1-value syntax since Firefox 3 (June > > 2008) and the 2-value syntax since Firefox 92 (September 2021). > > We already have a separate feature flag and ChromeStatus page [1]. > Unfortunately, it has been pending for years. I plan to ship it with this > two-value syntax once this new feature is done. But I don’t have a strong > opinion on the shipping plan. We can consider shipping separately. > > [1] https://chromestatus.com/feature/5720910061371392 > > > > > I'll also add that I'm a big fan of this feature and am happy to see it > > implemented. > > Thanks! > > > > > -David > > -- > 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/0E07FF35-2FC4-43BA-A55E-F269997FDD0D%40gmail.com. -- 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/4D77AF20-11CC-4132-A57D-27E97FE53843%40gmail.com.
