You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We agreed on the 27 Oct 2021 call to start a new issue about how to add generic font families. Below is my understanding of the current direction, as a way to start discussion.
There are two ways to go with the future evolution of generics:
Deprecate a couple, don't add any more, depend totally on downloaded webfonts
Realize that, as @r12a demonstrated, a large number need to be added, come up with criteria for adding them and a plan, perhaps a registry for trying out new ones, and recognize that these represent important distinctions which are necessary for some languages or scripts and may not be useful, or indeed map to an actual font, outside that usage.
It seems we have broad agreement that option 2 is the way to go.
This implies that new generics will be steadily added over time, which as @kojiishinoted gives us a potential name-clash problem. @frivoal suggested a generic() functional notation which would neatly solve that issue. @jfkthame had also suggested a functional notation
We should avoid being over-specific, as @fantasai mentioned, but also avoid being over-general or drawing forced analogies that do not take into account cultural factors (for example saying that cursive means brush drawn and also playful or informal, when it may mean the exact opposite, like "official and somewhat archaic government pronouncements"). And as @litherum noted, it is easier to discuss specific families rather than being too meta, once we have a general direction agreed upon.
In Scope
Finding the existing generic categories that particular communities need, and for each one document
the name
a description of what it signifies and how it is used
at minimum ,one font which would be appropriate for that generic. More is better.
the languages or scripts which are the primary audience for this generic.
Retrospectively applying that procedure to existing and already-proposed generics
Deprecating fantasy
Out of Scope
User-defined generics (how would content authors discover and use them)
Creating the latest and best completely universal type classification system which can accurately and uncontroversially classify any typeface ever created to an astonishing level of detail, which everyone agrees is the right one
(This spun out from [meta] [css-fonts] Criteria for generic font families #4910 )