Closed Bug 478179 Opened 16 years ago Closed 16 years ago

Incorrect font-weight for italic Helvetica Neue

Categories

(Core :: Graphics, defect)

x86
macOS
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 420981

People

(Reporter: phiw2, Assigned: jtd)

References

Details

(Keywords: regression, testcase)

Attachments

(1 file)

Attached file test case
given body {font: 300 1em/1.5 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif; /*Helvetica neue light*/} italicised text will use the ultra light face of Helvetica Neue, instead of the one with the same weight (in the example case: 'Helvetica neue light'. In the testcase, italics for font-weight 100, 200 and 300 all use the ultralight face [1]) OK Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2a1pre) Gecko/20090112 Minefield/3.2a1pre http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/ca9d3c35fe47 fails Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2a1pre) Gecko/20090113 Minefield/3.2a1pre http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/9dbded90af2a http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/pushloghtml?fromchange=ca9d3c35fe47&tochange=9dbded90af2a --> bug 455243 I suspect (the other possibility is bug 465452) [1]see bug 420981 for issue woth font-weight 100 and Helvetica Neue)
Flags: wanted1.9.1?
Flags: blocking1.9.1?
This is a duplicate of bug 420981. The testcase is different the underlying Apple bug is the same. Apple keeps telling me it's "fixed in SL xxx" but it still hasn't been corrected, even in the latest seed. Basically Cocoa tells us that the Light and UltraLight faces have the same weight. So if you want to mark something as blocking, mark it on bug 420981 please.
But this particular bug didn't happen until recently. Or did bug 455243 just make it visible ? Before the 20090112 build (and 20090115 Shiretoko build), Helvetica Neue Light was used for both the normal font-style and the italic font-style. After that, UltraLight is used for font-style italic for for font-weight 100,200 and 300.
(In reply to comment #2) > But this particular bug didn't happen until recently. Or did bug 455243 just > make it visible ? Yeah, that must be what's happening. Vlad put in a sort and that's probably subtly reordering things such that the behavior changed. I'll take a look.
Assignee: nobody → jdaggett
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Not marking blocking as per comment #1 -- sounds like we just permuted the behaviour.
Flags: wanted1.9.1?
Flags: wanted1.9.1-
Flags: blocking1.9.1?
Flags: blocking1.9.1-
Same problem as bug 420981, fixing there.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: