Skip to content

Conversation

@jfkthame
Copy link
Contributor

@jfkthame jfkthame commented Dec 2, 2020

This fixes #5744 by removing the exception-throwing step in the algorithm (that nobody has implemented), and adjusting the related note to reflect this.

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor

svgeesus commented Dec 2, 2020

@jfkthame have you linked your W3C account with your GitHub account. Our IPR bot claims not to know who you work for. We do, of course, but the bot won't listen to us.

Copy link
Contributor

@svgeesus svgeesus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree that this is closer to what is actually interoperably implemented.

@jfkthame
Copy link
Contributor Author

jfkthame commented Dec 2, 2020

@jfkthame have you linked your W3C account with your GitHub account. Our IPR bot claims not to know who you work for. We do, of course, but the bot won't listen to us.

I have now. :) (I wasn't aware of that procedure/requirement. But it turned out to be trivial, of course.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[css-font-loading] FontFaceSet.check() method: reality vs spec vs privacy

3 participants