W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > October 2010

Re: content-158 and content-159

From: Gérard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 09:04:14 -0700
Message-ID: <761ecbcdcc49e0cd7075788a06fd9cf9.squirrel@cp3.shieldhost.com>
To: "Řyvind Stenhaug" <oyvinds@opera.com>
Cc: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>, "Arron Eicholz" <arron.eicholz@microsoft.com>

> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 16:03:21 +0200, GĂ©rard Talbot
> <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org> wrote:
>>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101001/html4/content-158.htm
>>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101001/html4/content-159.htm
>>> (Author: Microsoft)
>>> These assume that the initial value of 'quotes' (which per spec
>>> "depends
>>> on user agent") has an apostrophe (U+0027) as opening quote for the
>>> second
>>> quoting level.
>> The initial value of quotes for second quoting level depends on the
>> language and common editorial convention for such language, as far as
>> I
>> can say.
> Sure. I'm just saying there's a lack of backing in terms of normative
> CSS2
> spec text.

Agreed. Ideally, the spec should be updated to specify first (outermost)
pair and second (nested) pair of quotation marks when lang attribute is
not specified. Ascii 34 (U+0022) and 39 (U+0027) would be best.

> I don't see any meta-information (HTTP headers, lang
> attributes) specifying the language either.

Correct. I don't see any either.

>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark,_non-English_usage#Overview
> Incidentally, that table doesn't specify "/' for any languages. Even for
> US English it has left/right double quotation mark (U+201C/U+201D) and
> left/right single quotation mark (U+2018/U+2019), and for UK English,
> the
> other way around.

Yes. There is no agreement/harmony  between those (wikipedia and J.
Wrage) documents and the examples in the W3C specs.

> I would suggest explicitly setting quotes: '"' '"' "'" "'" in the above
> tests (for div in the first and span in the second).

Well, yes. For those testcases.

What I also dislike in both testcases is
a) how small the glyph(s) is(are) and unneedlessly difficult to compare and
b) how the glyph(s) is(are) very close to the blue borders.

The font size for the character display should be at least 4 times
(400%) bigger; then a padding of 1em should be added to make things

On this page
anyone can quickly and easily see the glyph.

regards, Gérard
Contributions to the CSS 2.1 test suite:

CSS 2.1 test suite (RC2; October 1st 2010):

CSS 2.1 test suite contributors:
Received on Monday, 11 October 2010 16:04:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:13:21 UTC