On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote: >>> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalm...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>> Separately, FontFace.loaded seems to fulfill the same purpose as >>>>> FontFaceSet.ready(). I.e. both indicate that the object is done >>>>> loading/parsing/applying its data. It seems more consistent if they >>>>> had the same name, and if both were either an attribute or both were a >>>>> function. >>>> >>>> No, the two do completely different (but related) things. Why do you >>>> think they're identical? One fulfills when a *particular* FontFace >>>> object finishes loading, the other repeatedly fulfills whenever the >>>> set of loading fonts goes from non-zero to zero. >>> >>> Semantically they both indicate "the async processing that this object >>> was doing is done". Yes, in one instance it just signals that a given >>> FontFace instance is ready to be used, in the other that the full >>> FontFaceSet is ready. Putting the properties on different objects is >>> enough to indicate that, the difference in name doesn't seem >>> important? >> >> The loaded/ready distinction exists elsewhere, too. Using .loaded for >> FontFaceSet is incorrect, since in many cases not all of the fonts in >> the set will be loaded. > > Sure, but would using .ready() for FontFace be wrong?
Depends on how we end up designing the loaded/ready duo. ~TJ