View Single Post
Old 06-29-2017, 10:01 AM   #7
DiapDealer
Grand Sorcerer
DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
DiapDealer's Avatar
 
Posts: 28,373
Karma: 203720150
Join Date: Jan 2010
Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD
To summarize:

The font-family attribute should be identical in each of the @font-face declarations for all of the font-style variants for a particular font. And because of that, there's no good reason why the font-family attribute shouldn't match the font's internal name (since doing so will guarantee functionality on fringe device/apps, or fringe fonts--with zero downside for doing it).

It's the url attribute that should point to distinctly separate files (blahblahblah-normal.ttf, blahblahblah-ital.ttf, blahblahblah-bold.ttf, blahblahblah-bolditalic.ttf, blahblahblah-smallcaps.ttf, etc...)

Out of curiosity; what is your rationale for wanting to use something other than the font's internal name for the font-family attribute?

Last edited by DiapDealer; 06-29-2017 at 11:44 AM.
DiapDealer is offline   Reply With Quote