On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Brian Matherly <email@example.com>
>I notice both font and family use the sameIt sounds reasonable to me. The disadvantage is that it won't be possible to provide backwards compatibility and still offer reasonable defaults for the new (and recommended) properties because there will be no way to tell when size, style and weight properties should be applied (the new way), and when they should be ignored (because they are included in the font property the old way). What do you recommend for defaults? I can provide a patch tomorrow to change it.
>pango_font_description_from_string(). What do you think about not
>adding family and just use font? Then, stop encouraging usage of the
>font as a combo property in the examples and yml? (As a side benefit
>people authoring stuff by hand will find easier to remember font
>rather than family regardless of which is more correct. ;-)
yeah, agreed, we would have to figure out if the string contains just typeface or more.
Another thing occurred to me. The size property sets the absolute height of the entire image - which is fine for single line text because it will behave just like the "font size". But if text is laid out on more than one line, the font will be a fraction of the size specified because it will be shrunk to fit all lines within the specified size. That's probably not what people will be expecting.
Do you think the "absolute size" property is important? It wasn't documented. I propose that the size be applied to the font, and not the entire image. But I don't know if anyone is
agreed, it should be based on a single line
counting on the current "size" behavior. If they are, perhaps we should add an "absolute" property which will change the behavior of the "size" property to be either applied to the font or the entire image.
let's correct the behavior and bump the version in yml