- From: Koji Ishii via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 02:56:32 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Thank you Ken, this is really helpful and great start, and thank you @litherum for involving Ken into the discussion. I think what we need to agree first is how much accuracy we expect in this feature. No matter what we do, we will not get 100% accuracy. Even if we define a new Unicode property, the property cannot provide the perfect result because of unifications, Emoji presentations, etc. Remember the discussion on the vertical orientation property, it took over 2 years to define but we knew we need a CSS property to override because it will never be perfect. The strategy I prefer is to pick one existing Unicode property, and live with inconsistencies the property cannot distinguish well. It is easy to explain, author can learn what are the common inconsistencies, fast to compute, easy to implement, and authors are unlikely to be troubled by implementation bugs. It is very tempted to include a few characters, such as quotation marks as reported in this issue, but that is likely to start an endless discussion whether to include another character or not, and often it is ambiguous due to the nature of Unicode. If the strategy works for us, I still think EAW=F/W does a reasonable job, but if people disagrees, other properties that are more appropriate to use in line layout can provide different combination of consistencies and inconsistencies. Note, given the last discussion, in order for the discussion not be constrained by existing content, I'm thinking to disable it in LayoutNG until we get better consensus. -- GitHub Notification of comment by kojiishi Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/337#issuecomment-448840847 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2018 02:56:33 UTC