WebKit Bugzilla
New
Browse
Log In
×
Sign in with GitHub
or
Remember my login
Create Account
·
Forgot Password
Forgotten password account recovery
RESOLVED FIXED
56400
strong and b should be font-weight: bold, not bolder
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56400
Summary
strong and b should be font-weight: bold, not bolder
Aryeh Gregor
Reported
2011-03-15 12:07:44 PDT
HTML5 says b and strong have font-weight: bold instead of bolder:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/rendering.html#fonts-and-colors
Some discussion about this can be found at the following HTML5 and Mozilla bugs:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12154
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=589124
Mozilla received reports that some sites displayed incorrectly when Firefox 4 (with DirectWrite enabled on Windows) started actually respecting font-weights higher than 700, because they accidentally nested <b> tags and the text inadvertently became too bold. font-weight: bolder is inherently inconsistent across browsers and so shouldn't be the default style, IMO. Currently all browsers but Opera make b and strong font-weight: bolder, but in practice this is usually not observable because font-weights of 700, 800, and 900 generally get the same fonts assigned to them anyway. So changing to font-weight: bold is likely to increase compatibility, not decrease it. Test-case to demonstrate that the default is font-weight: bolder: data:text/html,<!doctype html> <p style=font-weight:100> <b>Should be bold per HTML5</b> Chrome 11 dev does not display the text bold.
Attachments
Patch
(18.44 KB, patch)
2011-06-30 14:29 PDT
,
Wyatt Carss
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
View All
Add attachment
proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Shane Stephens
Comment 1
2011-03-20 20:44:48 PDT
Clearly either we should fix this in WebKit or the spec should change.
Wyatt Carss
Comment 2
2011-06-30 14:29:51 PDT
Created
attachment 99366
[details]
Patch
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 3
2011-09-14 21:55:35 PDT
Comment on
attachment 99366
[details]
Patch Looks sane to me.
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 4
2011-12-21 15:58:20 PST
Comment on
attachment 99366
[details]
Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 99366 Committed
r103468
: <
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/103468
>
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 5
2011-12-21 15:58:25 PST
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Boris Zbarsky
Comment 6
2012-01-04 12:02:56 PST
For what it's worth, generally if the spec disagrees with _all_ implementations it's the spec that should change, not the implementations. Or so it seems to me. Note that this was explicitly a part of the spec flagged as being buggy, so I'm not sure why the WebKit behavior got changed to follow it...
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 7
2012-01-31 21:19:57 PST
(In reply to
comment #6
)
> For what it's worth, generally if the spec disagrees with _all_ implementations it's the spec that should change, not the implementations. Or so it seems to me.
>
> Note that this was explicitly a part of the spec flagged as being buggy, so I'm not sure why the WebKit behavior got changed to follow it...
Using font-weight: bolder as the default style of strong/b is problematic at best (e.g. when you nest b's and strong's) inside contenteditable region so I'm glad we changed our behavior.
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
Comment 8
2012-12-09 21:54:52 PST
Spec has been changed to say 'bolder', so this no longer matches the spec.
Ryosuke Niwa
Comment 9
2013-02-03 18:15:53 PST
(In reply to
comment #8
)
> Spec has been changed to say 'bolder', so this no longer matches the spec.
The value "bolder" is too troublesome for editing purposes. I don't think we'll change back.
Note
You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Top of Page
Format For Printing
XML
Clone This Bug